Monday, July 16, 2007
The birth of a meme: Arianna Huffington explains John McCain's downfall
Arianna Huffington, who knows infinitely more about politics than I do, is arguing that John McCain's presidential campaign is in so much trouble because of his full-throated support for the Petraeus strategy in Iraq.
John McCain's cratering campaign is an object lesson in how to kill a candidacy in three simple steps: 1) locate the biggest foreign policy disaster in U.S. history 2) embrace it 3) implode....
McCain's fate should be a warning to all Republicans seeking office in 2008: continue to back the president's war policy at your own risk.
Now, I am not an accomplished student of presidential politics, but it has literally never crossed my mind that John McCain's campaign for the Republican nomination has suffered among Republican activists because of his steadfastness on Iraq. I assumed that the two big problems were his amnesty-before-border security position on immigration and sheer mismanagement (the second of which Huffington tosses in as a "bonus" reason). Since Huffington is an accomplished student of politics and we know that Republican donors and primary voters do not read what she writes, either I am wrong or Huffington is disingenuously trying to push mainstream journalists -- who do read what she writes -- to ask the question, "did John McCain implode because of his support for Iraq?"
Starting memes is good work if you can get it.
MORE: The moon is blue. It is not every day that a single post gets approving links from both Glenn Reynolds and Glenn Greenwald. Thanks to both, and memo to Arianna: That is as close to a pan-blogospheric verdict as we are likely to get in this day and age.
38 Comments:
By 
O-Be-Wise, at
Mon Jul 16, 08:10:00 AM:
My experiences with and around politicians and the media "elite" have taught me several things, perhaps the most important being this one: Never assume that just because a media figure has been around Washington a long time, that person is an expert. Your evaluation of McCain's imploding campaign is precisely correct, while Huffington's is, as you accurately opined, a typical "expert's" strategy to drive MSM coverage and appear astute because she writes what her audeince wants to read.
McCain is on the ropes because of his amnesty preference, and mismanagement of his campaign (and his 2000 campaign) is not just an afterthought. You captured the order of his errors in exactly the right sequence. The conservative base could forgive mismanagement, and even admires him for his loyalty to the President on Iraq. Illegal immigration is where he lost base support and will never gain it back. Don't be fooled by Huffington's "credentials." Your analysis was far more insightful than hers.
By 
, at
Mon Jul 16, 08:20:00 AM:
At least in the blogosphere, his support for campaign finance reform has alienated a lot of people as well.
By Angevin13, at
Mon Jul 16, 08:42:00 AM:
Please, I'd say McCain's stance on Iraq is just about the only thing "right" with him. Immigration was the last straw. Plus, he was only the "frontrunner" according to the MSM. It makes for a great story to have the "GOP frontrunner" downed by his position on Iraq.
"McCain 2008," though, is finished. It was impossible - for me, at least - to ever get excited about his candidacy. He did himself no favors in that regard with his campaign's mismanagement.
By enuff, at
Mon Jul 16, 08:57:00 AM:
So...what will Arianna say of John Edwards, 'Was it the hair or was it the Smiles for Tax Breaks that brought-about his final undoing?'
We all know the answer to this one...
By Georg Felis, at
Mon Jul 16, 09:15:00 AM:
Even discounting his position on amnesty and tax cuts, McCain never connected with the Conservative Base because of a long history of violating the Reagans 11th commandment, “Thou shalt never speak ill of a fellow Republican” The press loved him because they could always both a Dem and McCain on TV criticizing whatever the Republicans were doing at the moment. This gave him a wide base of support about an inch deep that evaporated like dew when the press could not get him to be anti-war. And far too many Republicans have knife wounds in their back from him. I respect him for his record, but I do not see him as consistent, or as a good representative for the country in the Presidency.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 10:44:00 AM:
I consider myself a WSJ Conservative and therefore probably not as far right as the talk show hosts would like me to be, however there is hardly anything that Huffington comments on that does not make my skin crawl. Actually, I think of her as the guy from the Fed-Ex commercial who is always wrong ("You mean it is not French Benefits?") From a conservative base perspective there are far too many McCain examples of him going it alone or going against the conservative grain that has kept him from being a real candidate. There are some examples listed previosly, but add to the list that he did not back Bush's tax cuts in 2001, McCain-Feingold has been a boon for the left while hamstringing the right. He did not do nearly enough to rain in his own party in the Senate for fiscal restraint. However, the one area where he "gets-it" is the war on terror and that is why he is not being "booed-off" stages when he pitches to prospective conservatives.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 10:53:00 AM:
McCain-Feingold was the dealbreaker for me. And since then it seems as if every bad piece of legislation to come down the pipe has his name on on it. Throw in immigration, gang of 14, and of other issues where he's gone against the base, and it's not hard to see why he has little support.
I think he would be in trouble even if he'd run a perfect campaign.
RPD
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 10:55:00 AM:
McCain's problem is that all he cares about is McCain. Other candidates are the same, but McCain makes it just so obvious. The guy is a scumbag and always has been.
By Purple Avenger, at
Mon Jul 16, 11:25:00 AM:
I was a McCain supporter some years ago -- before I knew much detail about him or observed his actions much.
I came to believe he is so psychologically scarred by Vietnam that he unfit to hold the office of president. The more he opens his mouth, the more apparent this becomes to me.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 11:31:00 AM:
I've had trouble with McCain ever since his involvement in the Keating Five Scandal. He got off light in that one. Some of his more recent gaffes include his "campaign finance" fiasco, aka, McCain-Feingold. No. He's not someone I'm willing to trust with executive power.
BTW, he and I are about contemporaries in age and military service terms. I didn't have to spend several years in the Hanoi Hilton, but I was there practically from start to finish.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 11:49:00 AM:
When I read "Arianna Huffington, who knows infinitely more about politics than . . " at the top of this entry, I thought "Wow, that's hard to believe - a guy as tuned-in as Hawk has never read a word she's written or heard her utter a phrase - what a lucky guy". Because if you had done either of these things you'd know beyond all doubt that AH is clueless, vapid, and as dense at a 4x4 cut from mahogany.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 01:22:00 PM:
Awesome comments here on an Ivy blog! Who would have thunk it? However everyone omitted class rank at the Naval Academy puts him in the academic category of John Francois Kerry.
SEW
By Peter, at
Mon Jul 16, 01:41:00 PM:
The war? I wouldn't vote for McCain if he was running unopposed for dogcatcher of Dogpatch.
Keating.
Campaign Finance.
Gang of Fourteen.
Tax Relief.
The only thing that despicable crook McCain has going for him is the war.
By Brian, at
Mon Jul 16, 01:42:00 PM:
He did not do himself any favors by grandstanding (with Lindsey Graham) on the issue of our treatment of the murderous Islamist unlawful combatants we have captured. There is a sizeable chunk of Republicans that think we have been far too easy on the bastards (why have none of the detainees been executed yet?).
Seeing McCain and Graham work so hard to make sure that the detainees are not "mistreated" made me very concerned with whether McCain's captivity left him unable to be as tough as we will need to be to win this war.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 01:44:00 PM:
He's fine on Iraq. He lost most CONSERVATIVES on the other I word...IMMIGRATION...
IRAQ IS ABOUT THE ONLY ISSUE I AGREE WITH HIM ON...
WHY DON;T WE TRY SOMETHING "DIFFERENT" LIKE TOTALLY DESTROYING THE ENEMY AND "WINNING"?
By Escort81, at
Mon Jul 16, 01:52:00 PM:
I agree with Georgfelis above -- my sense is that McCain was never fully embraced by the Republican base. As a registered Independent, I don't consider myself to be part of that base, so I am not stating this from first-hand knowledge. I am pretty sure I recall a time during the 2004 presidential election when there was a rumor that had some traction that Kerry was considering McCain for the VP slot. I can imagine that base Republicans do not forget things like that.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 01:54:00 PM:
I would have to agree with the other commenters: it is NOT McCain's position on Iraq that has been his undoing. That actually is his MOST FAVORABLE aspect as far as I am concerned.
His problem as far as the campaign for the GOP nomination goes is indeed the combination of campaign finance "deform" and that stance he took re that ill-fated immigration bill. ONE of those would hurt him pretty badly; his advocating BOTH of them has pretty much ended him as a Presidential candidate, as far as I am concerned. It would take something like BOTH Giuliani and Thompson committing transgressions equal to McCain's to revive the Senator's campaign.
Will
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 02:07:00 PM:
If McCain's Achiles heel was his support for the war in Iraq, he would have never gotten off the ground. Furthermore, other GOP candidates who support the war are still polling high, not what one would expect if the issue of Iraq was driving support down.
McCain occasionally made the right noises on issues, but his record is full of wrong-headed apostsy on any number of things, some listed in these comments. GOP base voters have a justifiable distrust of McCain, and his support for the amnesty bill reminded them of the fact.
Jeffersonian
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 02:39:00 PM:
I’m an Iraq War supporter who thinks McCain’s Keating compromised position, his campaign finance “reform” and gang of 14 mentality have been really bad, but who agrees with Cruiser that McCain’s impassioned defense of terrorist suspect rights has been TOO MUCH. His stance on the illegal immigration biz is so *after* the fact of his conservative fecklessness and subsequent fall. Being right on Iraq doesn't obviate the corruptist-leftist rest.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 02:40:00 PM:
John McCain has made bad friends, and worse enemies. Either are a problem in politics, and both together are lethal.
By A Jacksonian, at
Mon Jul 16, 02:57:00 PM:
John McCain, for me at least, had a whole set of problems before coming into this year. He has 'reformed' so many times I don't know what he has formed into, these days. His 'Maverick' kit expired some years back and he needed to retire the poor thing and either suck it up and just be a politician with political past that was none too savory, or finally settle on *something*. And when he said that folks wouldn't pick lettuce for $50/hour and someone raised their hand at the meeting to say they would... well... you can only insult your voting base for so long before they really ask just 'why' you should be considered as representing them.
I will not vote for the man for *anything*. Ever.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 03:06:00 PM:
Like so many others leaving comment, i can say that the BEST thing about McCain was his support on Iraq and his attitude vis-a-vis Islamic fundementalist terror and terror-enabling states in general. That was the one thing keeping him from 'cratering' with the base long ago.
By Cardinalpark, at
Mon Jul 16, 03:13:00 PM:
McCain pissed the base off with Immigration, Campaign finance reform and a huge whopper in the Gang of 14 judges deal. That last one has the judicial conservatives really bent awhile back. The immigration bit just reminded them...
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 03:15:00 PM:
First, I agree that Arianna is wrong on this.
But in her defense!
1. She probably never actually encounters any conservatives, so she is forced to extrapolate from what she does know, and she is probably right in saying this:
Although McCain's support had been eroding since 2006, as more and more independent voters -- always a key chunk of his fan base -- turned against the war, January 2007 marked the beginning of a nose dive.<
That fan base would be more relevant in the general election than in primaries, but whatever...
2. A key part of McCain's strategy (to the extent he had a one) would have been a reprise of the free ride the media gave him in 2000. His support for the war probably cost him has position as a straight-talking media darling.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 03:52:00 PM:
To paraphrase Ms Huffington: 1) locate the biggest domestic policy disaster in recent history 2) embrace it 3) implode....
He's right on foreign policy, and while the Keating situation and McCain-Feingold are black marks (the latter perhaps pointing to a troubling tendency to embrace statist solutions) I don't think either would have been more than an irritant.
But between the Gang of 14 and, more particularly, immigration, he's spent the past couple years making those who should like him the most absolutely blood-spitting angry.
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Mon Jul 16, 04:05:00 PM:
I agree that Arianna's assessment of McCain's support from the base is risible. She may be right about the independents who supported McCain, however. Many of those are not independent thinkers as much as they are impression-followers and commitment-refusers (I don't accuse all independents of this). They may indeed have been scared off by his support for the war.
By Peg C., at
Mon Jul 16, 05:00:00 PM:
If all McCain did was support the war vigorously and shut up about himself and not sponsor legislation that not only endangers us but robs of us our liberties, I could consider voting for him. But I hold the same long list against him as quoted by so many above. Ahmahnuttajob himself would have to be running for pres before I'd vote for McCain.
How can anyone, nevermind someone I consider to be a twit like Huffington (listen to her sometime), who is an avowed lefty-liberal, speak for what might motivate me and other conservatives to utterly reject McCain? Clueless times 100. Or just manipulative and mendacious. I suspect the latter.
Saying it doesn't make it so, Ms. HuffPo.
McCain needs to be put out to pasture to gaze at his weeds and stay far away from cameras and microphones. It would do the country a big service.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 05:17:00 PM:
Speaking of fondness for statist solutions, McCain's support for Kyoto comes to mind as a deal breaker for me.
Libertarians may not be the power brokers in Republican politics, but some respect for the concept of smaller govt should still guide any candidate who hopes to put an R by their name in the general election. McCain is not that guy on many counts.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 05:20:00 PM:
Huff just wanted an election without a choice, which, if it weren't for McCains unfortunate (from her perspective) support of the war, she could have had with Hillary vs. McCain
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 05:26:00 PM:
I watched Arianna and the other lefties on the Chris Matthews Show debate this issue with similar conclusions about McCain. Then I happened to get around to Kimberly Strassel's Friday WSJ OpEd, where she nailed it in the second paragraph: Anti-GOP Campaign Finance reform, immigration reform before border control and opposition to tax cuts. Keating link and other items brought up here also make sense. Arianna has a one-track mind, IRAQ.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 06:53:00 PM:
I don't know why this line of thought is being attributed to Huffington. She is just one of the countless number of media types who have attributed McCain's decline to his Iraq position over the last weeks. Its obviously wrong, and just demonstrates that most media types have very little knowledge of what Republican primary voters care about.
I think its funny to see it repeated so much in the media.
By Fen, at
Mon Jul 16, 07:36:00 PM:
I ditched McCain for several reasons:
1) He's always been a media whore
2) Gang of 14 instead of confronting unconstitutional[?] filibuster
3) McCain-Feingold
4) amnesty before border control
McCain's support of amnesty without genuine enforcement was the last straw for me. As for HuffPo, she's an idiot - McCain's support for the war effort has been his only redeeming quality.
By , at
Mon Jul 16, 08:49:00 PM:
John McCain's biggest problem is that he is John McCain.
By JM Hanes, at
Mon Jul 16, 08:53:00 PM:
The only person Arianna needs to persuade is McCain.
Here's the plan: You create enough buzz to turn this meme into conventional MSM wisdom, the polls begin to follow, the clueless McCain camp starts to worry, McCain starts trying to avoid the subject, et voilá: you've neutralized the most effective defender of the war. Worth a shot? You bet.
By Purple Avenger, at
Tue Jul 17, 11:27:00 AM:
What started queering me on him was finding out about the MIA whitewash McCain and Kerry architected so Clinton could upgrade trade status with Vietnam.
That some remains were turned over AFTER McCain/Kerry declared Vietnam "clean" demonstrated how bogus that whole dance actually was.
That started me thinking this is not a guy I can trust.
By Texas Gal, at
Tue Jul 17, 12:45:00 PM:
I admit I was never wedded to McCain as my choice for the GOP candidate but he totally lost me when he kept insisting that his version of the "we don't torture people and the world will believe us with this amendment" be attached to the military funding bill.. and "he was going to keep attaching it until the President signed it".
Thus, the 'world' likes us better now that we can't waterboard captured terrorists. /sarc off
By , at
Wed Jul 18, 03:19:00 PM:
McCain-Feingold. That's when I threw him under the bus.
Anybody who can't parse the words "Congress shall make no law..." is unfit for the presidency. And since Bush didn't veto it, he also lost me at that point.
My 1st Amendment rights are of the highest importance to me.
Chester White
By , at
Tue Apr 22, 12:57:00 PM:
Brand Duromine Ionamin weight loss drug is a popular brand name timed-release resin
version for the weight loss diet pill phentermine, and is used in combination with diet and exercise,to help you lose weight. It works by decreasing your
appetite.
Generic Meridia/Reductil SIBUTRAMINE HCI drug is a prescription medication thats used to
help people lose weight by acting on the appetite control centers in the brain. Studies have shown that using Meridia helps patients lose weight and maintain
weight loss for up to 2 years.
Xenical Orlistat weight loss drug blocks some of the fat that you eat from being absorbed
by your body. Orlistat is used in the management of obesity including weight loss and weight maintenance when used with a reduced-calorie diet.
Generic Xanax Alprazolam drug without prescription is used to treat anxiety disorders and
panic attacks. Alprazolam is in a class of medications called benzodiazepines. It works by decreasing abnormal excitement in the brain.
Generic Valium Diazepam drug is used to relieve anxiety, muscle spasms, and seizures and
to control agitation caused by alcohol withdrawal. Valium brand medication.
