On McCain’s apparent front-runner status *UPDATED*

Compared to Romney, I don’t like McCain. Compared to Obama or Hillary, I adore McCain and would happily vote for him — heck, if I were voting in Chicago (home turf for both Obama and Hillary), I’d vote for him twice, and have my ancestors vote for him too. You dance with them whut brung ya’, and it looks as if McCain may be the Republican dance partner in the 2008 Presidential election.

So, if you’re one of those conservatives who who thinks McCain is too liberal (and, compared to your candidate of choice, whoever he is, I’m sure you’re right), or who worries about the Gang of 14 (although reading this may allay some of your concerns), or who hasn’t forgiven him for McCain-Feingold, or who just plain doesn’t like him — get over it! He may not be the perfect Republican candidate, but he’s so much better than either Hillary or Obama that it really doesn’t matter. If you believe in conservative principles and fear the fall-out from Democratic policies, you have what amounts to a moral obligation to get out there in November and vote for him. Do not, I repeat, do not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Also, if it makes you feel better about casting your vote, there are some indications that he is truly a winning candidate. That is, you won’t be compromising your principles with a vote that is ultimately wasted. A Rasmussen poll that the Captain discusses has him beating out both Obama and Hillary if an election were held today. Now, that may change when one of the Dems emerges victorious from the primary process, in which case more voters may coalesce around the winner, but it’s still good news for those who feel that it’s as important for a Democrat to lose as for a Republican to win.

And if you think I’m being exceptionally vindictive in devoutly wishing for a Democratic loss, here’s my defense: While I think we as a nation are a robust enough to fix any economic messes the Democrats may cause, I also think that we have a one shot deal to remain ascendant when it comes to the World War that the Islamists are waging against us. If we have a Democrat in the White House, especially Obama who can’t get out of Iraq fast enough, we’ll have wasted that shot.

(I have to admit I’m not pleased with Michelle Malkin for hinting that she’d rather see Hillary win than help out McCain. Hmmm….)

UPDATEBig Lizards has a very compelling post about McCain’s charisma — an important intangible we often overlook.  I have to say that, when I catch McCain’s speeches on the radio, I enjoy listening, which is not something I can say about any other politician’s speeches, including those of my man Romney.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • http://www.clashofculture.com Brad

    I wish we could elect a true conservative. But when it comes to the general election McCain might be the best chance we’ve got at getting anything on the right side of the line.

    -Brad
    http://www.clashofculture.com

  • Pingback: Webloggin - Blog Archive » On McCain’s Apparent Front-Runner Status()

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ ymarsakar

    What about McCain’s anger management issues?

  • Danny Lemieux

    Let them be directed to the Jihadis, YM.

  • http://OgBlog.net Earl

    Agreed, Danny……hope that’s where it’s directed. History is not a comfort, though.

    My worry is economic – McCain is no friend of tax cuts, and he’s in bed with the Global Warming crowd. When the spending of our money on “solving the problem”, plus the curbing of our economy by the blizzard of regulations, hit American business, we’re going to see stagnation to match the ’70s……

    Or so is my fear. I’m gnashing my teeth and praying.

    Look on the bright side – maybe he freaks in public at some point, and his candidacy implodes!

    Yikes!! Time for bed.

  • Carol

    McCain will be a horror, but not as big a one as either of the two “liberal fascists” he will be running against. Can we take some consolation that he really will be too old to run for re-election?

  • Nashoa

    I don’t like McCain, but I would have vote for him over Obama or Hillary. Then he pulled the lie about Rommy in Florida. I don’t really know if I can vote for him after that. The only thing he had going was honor, and he proved it was a total myth.

  • Al

    Let’s not all jump ship yet. If this Tuesday is a draw, the convention is a long way away and anything can happen prior to November whatever happens on Tuesday. If McCain pulls into a commanding lead, and Romney folds, there are the House and Senate races we can work on. And we must work on them. Here in NJ there is a woman declaring against the somnambulant Senator Lautenberg. Even the arcane world of NJ politics, she could defeat him.
    Al

  • Oldflyer

    I sit here stunned that we are suddenly contemplating McCain as the near inevitable nominee. I still don’t understand how it happened.

    If he is the nominee I will hold my nose and vote for him.

    His anger and erratic behavior worry me. I don’t agree with most of his policies.

    I don’t really trust him to appoint Judges who will actually respect the Constitution. But I can hope. On the othe hand, I know what kind of Judges Hillary or Obama would appoint. To me that is the crucial point. A President can be dumped in four years. A President has a lot of constraints on his/her actions. But, Judges are forever and in the aggregate have unconstrained power. Either Hillary or Obama, teamed with a Democratic Senate, could do long term harm.

  • Danny Lemieux

    To your point, Oldflyer…McCain still have plenty of time to do or say something stupid. It ain’t over until it’s over. However, if it is a choice between McCain and either Hillary or Obama, it’s an easy one for me.

    Boycotting the election because one candidate is not quite perfect enough to meet my high expectations has never been an option.

  • jj

    McCain says stupid things constantly, Danny; what I don’t get is: why does it not matter? How does he get away with it?

    Here’s a man who essentially is a NOTHING – he has precisely the same executive experience Hillary or Obama does: zero. He’s up against a man who has run a business very successfully, and run a state very successfully. This in a country where we do not like to elect as President people who’ve never run anything. (Kennedy was the last from the senate, that’s 48 years ago; I can’t remember who it was before him. Even Harding ran a newspaper!)

    And not only is he a nothing, he is, I was reminded again in last night’s debate, a fairly snotty little bastard, too. And will lie cheerfully aboiut both his own and anyone else’s record.

    And now that he’s the front-runner, you will see condescension and arrogance right up there on a plane with Hillary’s – you watch.

    I’m afraid a lot of Republicans (Republicans being principled people) are going to sit it out if he’s the nominee. They did in 2006; it isn’t much of a stretch to see them doing it again this year.

  • Danny Lemieux

    I hear you, jj.

    Don’t forget to add LBJ to your list.

    I’m supporting Romney. However, sitting out the election is just as bad as supporting Hillary or Obama. It would be an abdication of my responsibility as a citizen. I grew up in Europe where too many people took that same attitude (why bother voting?) and now they have just about lost their democracy and begun the slide into fascism. If the outcome of the election is bad, at minimum I can say that it wasn’t because I defaulted. That, I can live with (I hope).

    Sometimes, the choice is between bad and worse. In McCain’s defense, I neither think that he is fundamentally corrupt Left-wing totalitarian (i.e., Hillary), nor do I think that he is a socialist utopian (i.e., Obama). And, bottom line, I may disagree with McCain on a number of policy issues but I do not question his love for country (vs the “European” one-worlders. Obama and Hillary).

  • jj

    LBJ was a VP, Danny, during a time in which the P died – same thing happened with Coolidge. Andrew Johnson was also a senator-VP, and also succeeded via death.

    We like VPs; we like governors; we like the military (which was a part of the JFK deal too), and that’s pretty much our preference. We do not like or elect people who’se only experience was either congress or the senate: we like people who’ve established they can run something.

    Recent history:

    Bush – governor
    Clinton – governor
    Bush – VP; ran the CIA, war hero
    Reagan – governor
    Carter – governor
    Ford – VP
    Nixon – VP
    Johnson – VP
    Kennedy – senator; war hero (sort of)
    Eisenhower – commanding general war hero
    Truman – VP
    Roosevelt – governor
    Hoover – headed the Commission of Relief for Belgium from 1914-1919; served as Director of Wilson’s Food Administration and ran European relief post WWI – so he ran things.
    Coolidge – VP, succeeded upon Harding’s death

    And so it mostly goes.

    We don’t much have a lot of use for people who only know how to hire someone to run their senate office. It happens, sure – practically anything does – but it isn’t our first choice.

  • Oldflyer

    Danny, based on his history I fully expect McCain to come unhinged at some point. What I fear is that it will happen after he is the Nominee. In fact I fully expect the Clinton campaign will needle him at every opportunity to try to trigger one of his patented tirades.

    I suspect Romney may be trying the same tactic to an extent. It is high risk. The media will jump on him for being “mean” to a war hero if he is really aggressive; particularly if McCain can hold on to his temper through the primaries. But, if he gets desperate enough then he should let it fly.

    I agree. If McCain is the nominee I will vote for him–for the specific reasons I posted.

  • jj

    Oh, all right, since I was asked, I’ll finish it up:

    Wilson – governor
    Taft – governor-general of the Philippines, Secretary of War
    Roosevelt (Teddy) – governor of NY, VP
    McKinley – governor of Ohio
    Harrison – brigadier General war hero & senator
    Cleveland – governor of NY
    Arthur – VP
    Garfield – Major General war hero & congressman
    Hayes – governor of Ohio & Major General war hero
    Grant – Supreme Commander war hero
    Johnson – VP
    Lincoln – one term in congress – so he’s in the JFK class, (that McCain, Clinton, & Obama want to be in)100 years before JFK
    Buchanan – senator, congressman – an experience-free zone when it comes to running anything
    Pierce – Brigadier General war hero & senator
    Fillmore – VP
    Taylor – Brigadier General war hero
    Polk – governor of Tennessee
    Tyler – governor of Virginia
    Harrison – governor of the Northwest Territory & war hero (War of 1812)
    Van Buren – VP & governor of NY
    Jackson – war hero & Territorial Governor of Florida
    Adams – senator, and sec. of state – no experience at running anything
    Monroe – governor of VA
    Madison – Continental Congress, wrote the Constitution; never ran anything
    Jefferson – VP & governor of Virginia
    Adams – VP
    Washington – commanding general war hero.

    So, I shall repeat: we do not like people who have not demonstrated an ability to run something. There have only been 5 of them fromt he ranks of the congress or the senate: James Madison, who wrote Federalist Papers and the Constitution, which counts for something, I suppose; J. Q. Adams, who did little as President; Buchanan, who was a mess as President; Lincoln, who was probably a mess in terms of policy but sure was eloquent; and JFK, all mess.

    We have had 20 governors; 13 VPs (if you count Coolidge, Van Buren, and Jefferson, who were both); and 9 Generals, (including Harrison, Hayes, and Jackson, who were Generals and governors).

    We seem much happier with people with a demonstrated executive ability – which Clinton, Obama, and McCain do not have.

  • suek

    >>On the othe hand, I know what kind of Judges Hillary or Obama would appoint. To me that is the crucial point.>>

    Very good point. Probably the only one that would convince me to vote for him if he’s the nominee.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/ ymarsakar

    I read a comment at VC that said McCain pulled a Kerry on someone. You know, where Kerry, in response to a question or challenge, says “Do you know who I am? I am the Senator from X.”

  • http://www.couriercritic.blogspot.com babbie

    Maybe it’s because I don’t listen to Rush Limbaugh any more or maybe it’s because the first time I voted it was for Barry Goldwater (yes, I was just under the wire). Maybe those of you complaining about McCain’s not being a conservative need a longer perspective. He’s not a liberal, even if he has taken maverick positions that especially haven’t toed the party line. He’s simply not a liberal, no matter how many times the media and Limbaugh say he is. I hated his position on immigration and still do. I believed it was the end of his campaign. It wasn’t. McCain appeals because he is an authentic voice for conservative principles. Is Romney? I don’t like that he “moderated” his positions to get elected governor, even though I understand why he had to. It’s the “straight-talk” aspect of McCain’s personality that may actually get him elected. You may not agree with him, but you know where he stands.

  • Tap

    I think you all must be suffering from BCS. It’s a newly discovered syndrome closely related to BWS – battered wife syndrome.

    Battered Constituent Syndrome often manifests itself initially with denial, followed by attempts to excuse and protect your abuser. This is closely followed by protestations along the lines of the following: ‘But…he’s the best I can get, and he’s better than that other guy. Did you see him??’

    All of this only leads to further degradation, campaign season after campaign season.

    I can only urge you to seek help. Please. Do it for the children.

  • Pingback: Connecting News, Commentaries and Blogs at NineReports.com -()