What Will McCain Do Now?
He’s already changed principles and positions
The revival of John McCain’s
presidential candidacy, now expected to carry him through to his
party’s nomination, can be interpreted either as proof of the judgment
of Republican primary voters or evidence of the paucity of alternative
choices. Certainly, it confirms the wisdom of betting against the
predictions of the national press corps, which produced so many
sorrowful post-mortems on his campaign.
Very soon, if not
instantly, the same pundits who wrote off McCain’s chances will be
assuring us that the recent hasbeen is now an electoral juggernaut.
They will describe him as resplendent in political valor, reforming
zeal and militant patriotism, and of course brimming with “straight
talk.” Of such shiny publicity has the Arizona senator’s image been
built over the past decade or so.
What remains to be seen is
whether his admirable image will withstand fresh scrutiny as he becomes
the presumptive nominee—and how independents, Democrats and
conservative Republicans will respond to an updated portrait of him.
The price of his victory may well be measured in principles dropped,
and in positions flipped and flopped.
He has quietly walked
away from his former allies on campaign finance reform. He has run away
from his own immigration reform legislation. He has sold away the
commitment to economic fairness and fiscal discipline that once led him
to oppose the skewed Bush tax cuts. On at least one issue, however, he
remains absolutely consistent.
As he said not long ago, he
favors dispatching generations of American soldiers to Iraq for a
hundred years or more, while spending trillions of borrowed dollars not
only on that war, but others to come in unspecified countries. “Bomb
bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran” is the mindless motto of the McCain foreign
policy.
Too Much Like Bush?
In
an election year when voters say they are demanding change from the
failures and follies of the Bush years, this political profile could
create serious problems for any candidate. For McCain, the dangers may
be even greater, because while he resolutely upholds an unpopular war,
he has forfeited the single issue that could most easily inflame the
Republican base as well as many independents.
Any other
Republican running against either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would
quickly put the Democrats on the defensive over their refusal to
promise that millions of undocumented workers and their families will
be deported someday soon, or ever. Any other Republican would be able
to portray the Democratic Party as advocates of unrestricted
immigration and “amnesty” for immigrants who have entered the United
States illegally.
It is simple to conjure a negative ad
showing dark, frightening foreigners, with a script bemoaning lost
jobs, rising crime and welfare costs, even the threat of terrorism.
Stimulating fear has become a tradition in American elections. But
McCain cannot benefit from that kind of demagogic commercial. After
all, he was for amnesty before he was against it, as his conservative
critics might put it.
And much as he may now wish to pretend
that the issue is moot, his name remains on the reform bill sponsored
by Sen. Edward Kennedy. Advisers to McCain may plan to mount a
different brand of fear-based attack, much as former White House
adviser Karl Rove did so successfully during the 2002 and 2004
elections. That campaign would feature ads assaulting the Democrats as
disloyal and timid, for daring to voice even the mildest objection to
the Bush administration’s surveillance and torture policies.
Dramatic
commercials might steal a page from television, with a president trying
to decide how to interrogate a suspect who knows where to find the
nuclear suitcase bomb. Could we count on a Democrat to authorize the
waterboarding in time? Yet that scary scenario won’t work for McCain,
either, because he has stood forthrightly against torture, to the great
dismay of many detractors in his own party.
The war in Iraq
will afford him the chance to draw sharp distinctions with his
Democratic opponent, but that difference will place him on the wrong
side of the electorate. He will win points, perhaps, for sticking with
the unpopular position. But with the prospect of recession growing each
day, his devotion to military solutions and neglect of economic
concerns may make him appear not only dangerous, but also irrelevant.
2008 Creators Syndicate Inc. What’s your take? Write: editor@shepex.com.



Letters
Comments