The Economist says Republicans should stop fretting about their choices in this year's election and realize they already have a "political star in their ranks" — Sen. John McCain.
While dismissing the rest of the field as either unreliable, inexperienced or lacking judgment, the magazine says McCain has stuck to his guns. The problem is that those guns have usually been turned on his own party — something the magazine acknowledges, but defends as "driven by his (usually justified) conviction that they were betraying Republican principles."
The magazine goes on to say: "He has also been right about some big issues. He was the first senior Republican to criticise George Bush for invading Iraq with too few troops, and the first to call for Donald Rumsfeld's sacking. He is one of the few Republicans to propose sensible policies on immigration and global warming."
And there it becomes clear: what the Economist really wants is a Democrat to run for the Republican nomination.
This highlights the real problem for McCain: The issues he's staked out over the eight years since his 2000 presidential run — Iraq, global warming, corruption in government, torture, giving a path to citizenship to illegal aliens, campaign finance reform, clamping down on gun shows — are all better-suited for a Democratic candidate than a Republican. That campaign finance push still irks conservatives, and they are reminded of it every time they get another fundraising letter from the NRA, National Right to Life or dozens of other organizations that still chafe under the McCain-Feingold law.
Those voters say it's not so much the party that is rejecting McCain, but McCain who ran away from his party.
Remember, this is a man who flirted with rejecting his own party and running with Sen. John Kerry in 2004 and who some reports say considered bolting in 2001 as well.
Given all that, the Economist shouldn't be surprised most Republican voters are looking elsewhere.
— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times
Comments (4)
John McCain certainly is strong on all three legs of the conservative agenda. He is very strong on military and foreign affairs - and has actually served his country in uniform - which used to be a Republican party value before the recent spate of cut and runners who talk the talk but don't walk the walk. He has been consistent on the social and economic issues. He has revised his stance on immigration to push for strong borders first. Has Rudy Giuliani pushed against the party due to his social issues? Is Mitt Romney less a conservative because he has evolved in his stance on social issues? Is Fred Thompson less a conservative because he has been married twice, and has been less vigorous on abortion?
The emnity toward John McCain is that he actually is a lot stronger than the majority of a weak party who talk the talk but don't walk the walk - and are incredible wusses - cut and runners closer to the Dems than he is.
Perhaps many of us need to support a party that is less metro and more muscular.
Posted by PAXALLES | December 8, 2007 7:09 AM
Sorry, Paxalles, but I prefer a politician who hasn't "evolved" so much. Giuliani is a law-and-order, small-government, pro-Israel, UN-disrespecting, pro-gay, abortion-sympathizing Republican. The last two items will piss off many conservatives. Oh well. I suspect that some Dems who are worried about terrorism will be less likely to vote Democratic if the Republicans are led by Giuliani. They may not vote at all--but that would be a plus as well. For a Dem to win, it helps for him to come from the South. It wouldn't hurt for a Republican to come from NYC.
To McCain's credit, he has supported the Iraq war, even if he has disagreed with the strategies employed (and he has been correct to do so; I understand the current strategy is basically what he recommended all along).
To McCain's detriment, his views about open immigration are just a disaster. I'm not sure G. is good on this issue (I suspect not), but I also do not think he will be such an activist about it.
Posted by Sam | December 9, 2007 12:13 PM
Should McCain be chastised for doing what he feels is right for this country? I for one believe we have been embroiled far too long in a government bogged down by partisan politics, and are in need of a political figure who does what is right, regardless of how the issue lines up with Democrats or Republicans. I do not always agree with Sen. McCain, but he is the only candidate that I trust will do what he believes is right for America, no matter if it is considered Democratic or Republican-minded. Does America trust Guiliani and Romney would do the same? In my mind, this country could do much worse than to elect McCain the next president.
Posted by Publius | December 10, 2007 10:26 AM
JOHN JOHN THE NEO-CON
JOHN MC-CAIN - "AMNESTY! AMNESTY! AMNESTY!"
JOHN MC-CAIN - "BOMB! BOMB! BOMB!"
JOHN MC-CAIN - GOING! GOING
Posted by Jeugenen | December 20, 2007 12:36 PM