John McCain

This is the anniversary of a tragic day, September 29, 2008. That was the last day I believe John McCain could have salvaged the 2008 Presidential election.

The McCain campaign started losing altitude following the mid-month collapse of Lehman Brothers, leading McCain to leave the campaign trail to stay in Washington to respond to the crisis.  This led to a confusing set of events surrounding whether McCain would attend the first debate; which he did.  By Monday morning, September 29, it a ppeared a deal to approve the $700 billion bailout was in place and the House was supposedly in line to vote "aye".

Assuming the time had come to return to the stump, McCain left Washington to join Sarah Palin at a rally in Columbus, OH.  This decision doomed his chances.

Many argue McCain was politically dead for even supporting the unpopular bailout , but if there's one thing worse than being unpopular, it's' being both ineffective AND unpopular.  Having chosen the unpopular path, McCain had to, as an absolute necessity, get the bill passed and gotten back on the trail arguing the crisis had been addressed and he helped promote a solution..

While McCain was in Ohio that morning, Speaker Pelosi decided that insulting the Republican party was a good way to spout off when she needed their votes. Enough bailed to scuttle the bill. Many flipped back to support a somewhat amended version a week later. Many of these folks are no longer in Congress.

John McCain faced incredible obstacles in 2008 ...a popular opponent, having to defend an unpopular incumbent President from his own party, and a weak economy. Given this, he needed to maximise his own assets. And he absolutely needed every possible day to draw the contrast with Barack Obama. One rally, even in Ohio, wasn't worth the risk he would lose the chance to punch through with his own message nationally because of events in Washington.

We don't know if McCain whipping the House Republicans would have gotten TARP passed a week sooner, but by failing to put his shoulder to the wheel (and not "assuming the second out of the double play"), McCain cost himself two things he could never recover--he lost a week of the campaign and he lost credibility for returning to Washington only to see things fall apart anyway. The split in the polls reached  double digits in early October, never to fully close.

There's a lesson here somewhere, not that I expect the Beltway brain trust to figure it out. 

I am watching MSNBC's Morning Joe. Joe Scarborough is going off the rails by mischaracterizing John McCain's statement to the Huffington Post. McCain said:

"I know what side I'm on," McCain cut in. "I'm on the side of the people. I'm not on Ahmadinejad's side or Mousavi. I'm on the side of the Iranian people and I'm on the right side of history. And I'm not going to walk on the other side of the street while people are being killed and beaten in the streets of Iran."

This seems clearly the right answer. There is plenty of evidence that Mousavi is a thug. It is clear that Ahmadinajad is ... bad.

But you can be on the side of a process that empowers the people with honest elections.

McCain's point is that President Barack Obama called people getting beaten up and killed in the streets an "robust" "debate".  Obama has no instinctual interest in defending human rights. This fundamental problem for Obama and much of the left was nicely characterized by EJ Dionne earlier this week in the Post.

That's something to be outraged about. Both sides are going off the rails on this issue.

Not to undermine the administrators since apparently my log-in had been blocked, but for any members of this organization which claims to be a conservative site and which is in some areas would like to email me with any questions on Barry Goldwater or John McCain (since I lived in Arizona over 45 years, and campaigned for Senator Goldwater, and graduated one year ahead of Cindy McCain from the same grammar and high school), please let me know.

I am an expert on both "Republicans" and also was a member of the Republican Party for many years, until the first Bush, and also have much local information about both candidates that is a little more enlightening than what you will find in the media.

My blog is also available for any interested Constitutionalists, at www.backupamerica.org.

Good luck to you on your mission of the "Next Right," but I do think the Republican and Democratic labels are long, long dead.  And Goldwater and McCain are as different as night and day, and after Keating, Senator Goldwater did not have much good to say about Senator McCain - and that "general" information can be found online.

Oh, and there are many, many homeless veterans in Arizona now due to the support Senator McCain has for the illegals along with Ms. Napolitano, who was also my Governor for six, , and for which blame can be laid directly on his misrepresentation of Arizonans on this issue for years - so much so that Phoenix now has the distinction as the "Kidnapping Capitol of the World."

If any are interested in either the blog, or any further information on the fractured party, Arizona is fundamental in what has occurred there, since Senator McCain really was not an Arizonan, but a politician who simply moved to Arizona after his marriage to an Arizona native.

Again, good luck on trying to change this beleagured party, but there is not a shred of true "Republicanism" left in it at this point, and has not been for quite some time.

For a guy out of office and not going to seek any, people are paying an awful lot of attention to Colin Powell.

And they shouldn't.

This puts me at odds with folks of the right who are irate at Powell and those who welcome his continued participation.

Hey, if Colin wants to stay a Republican that's fine. The bottom line is he never was a very partisan Republican and I don't think we should lose any sleep if he disagrees with much of what the party is doing. (as an aside, lets also not scream in horror everytime some Republican says he's not a Rush fan.   Makes us look rather thin skinned) 

Powell is one of those folks who although they emerge from humble beginnings are now firmly entrenched in the D.C. establishment. He has never sought elective office not campaigned much for others. and indeed suggested in 2000 he would have been willing to serve in a Gore administration. Nope, he's the inside guy to staff the less partisan levers of the federal government.  An establishment guy.

And from 1980 to 2008 that was usually a place where a Republican was pretty welcome, since we either held the White House or Congress for 26 of the 28 years.  And now it isn't.

Powell may use the rationalization that the party drifted to the right, though clearly it was more vocally conservative on many issues prior to George W. Bush's definition of the party. And using Sarah Palin as an excuse won't wash.  Evidently the equally derided Dan Quayle was insufficient reason for Powell to search for the exits back then.    

I also reject the charge by Limbaugh that Powell was solely motivated by racial kinship in his Obama endorsement.  Had Obama been unacceptable to the Beltway bramin, he'd have been unable to gain Powell's support.

Nope, this was all about Dr. Gallup. Powell is a symptom of much of what defines a moderate--they are dyed-in-the -wool frontrunners. Had McCain been leading Obama into the homestretch I have no doubt the General would have been side-by-side with Mac singing his praises.

The argument being made now by the Beltway establishment is that we need to cater to the interests of folks like Powell to gain back our path to elective success.  I'm not for RINO bashing as a path to power, but let's be real. This proposal is simply backasswards.

Moderates won;t come back to the ranks of the Republican party because we beg them. They will come back because we look like we are going to win some elections and we make the otther guys look extreme or incompetent. The DC press has cause and effect reversed.

Indeed consider this. If Powell was convinced that the GOP couldn't mount a comeback he wouldn't leave the door open to come back in.  A general always thinks strategically.

Colin Powell endorsed and worked for Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43, all of whom were to the right of John McCain..  It wasn;t the policies that drove him off in 2008, it was the popularity. Powell's influence would have sunk with the ship had he endorsed McCain.

I think the Republicans should be a "big tent" party. My point is the first thing to do is to build the tent, not worry so much about the folks who will always stand around the periphery waiting to be cajoled inside.

With the recent defection of Arlen Specter and the entry of Charlie Crist into the Florida Senate race, much has been recently made of an alleged split between moderate and conservative Republicans.  While I think there's some truth to this argument, I also think it misses the point.  The problem is that "Republican Moderate" is such a broad category that it doesn't mean anything.

With that in mind, I want to differentiate between two types of Republican Moderates.  For the sake of clarity, I'm going to define them as the "Rudy Giuliani Moderates" and the "Arlen Specter Moderates."

Who are they?!?

Rudy Giuliani -- These are the Republicans who are Conservative on most issues and have a few issues where they legtimately disagree with the Republican base.  In Rudy's case, he's GREAT on National Security, the Economy, Health Care, Education, Crime, and a whole host of other issues.  At the same time, there are a few issues where Rudy differs from the GOP mainstream: Life, Gun Control, and Cross Dressing.

Moderates like Rudy are our friends.  When people talk about a big tent, that's fine.  We need to be inclusive of people who are with us on most of the issues even when they differ on a few.  Reagan said it best when he said: "My 80% friend is not my 20% enemy."

Recruiting candidates who fall into the Rudy Giuliani mold who are well suited to a particular district or state is a essential.  We can't be excessively doctriaire in who we recruit.

(Author's Note: John McCain, Lindsay Grahmnesty, Mark Kirk, and Sheriff Dave Reichart all fit into this category.)

That said, there's another type of "moderate" candidate we need to avoid like the plague.

Arlen Specter -- These are "Republicans" who find it politically expedient to run for office with an R after their name and are nothing more than gloified prostitutes seeking power and personal aggandizement.  While Specter was a respectable Judiciary commitee chairman and backed most of Reagan's defense buildup in the 1980's that's the only useful thing he's ever done in the United States Senate.  Otherwise, he's been a thorn in the side of Conservative reform for the past three decades.  Beyond his vote for Porkulus, Specter led the Smear Campaign against Judge Robert Bork, and he sold his soul to the trial lawyer lobby over the asbestos bailout.  Unlike the Giuliani style moderates, who actually care about Public Affairs, people like Arlen Specter are in Politics to increase their personal power and will do or say whatever it takes to make that happen.

Arlen Specter style prostitutes shred our credibility and dilute our message.

(Author's Note: George Pataki, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Colin Powell all fit into this category.)

As I said several months ago: Apostates are O.K.; Grandstanding RINO's are not.

Thoughts/Suggestions?!?

Cahnman out.

Meghan is a force to be reckoned with. She is not the bimbo/valley girl that many on our side portray her and neither should they ignore this - Progressive Powerhouse.    So what am I saying? That conservatives should sit down with her and seek to find common ground?    NO!! Meghan McCain represents a new progressive wing of the Republican Party that has gone on the offensive against Conservatism. Extreme/Radical Moderates, they are. In that sense Meghan and her sort are just as much a foe as are liberal democrats.   And they should be considered as such. She and her ilk have chosen this confrontational path.   These intemperate and immoderate moderates started this fight and it is up to Movement Conservatives to get up out of their whimpering fetal position, stop sucking their thumbs, turn and confront. Start pushing back!    If they fail to stand and fight, this Conservative Movement that Ronald Reagan and others so lovingly constructed, brick by brick, could certainly (and soon) become nothing more than a footnote in some future history book. What was once a “shining city on a hill” will appear only as distant ruins to wayfarers passing by. 

 Meghan McCain is, no doubt, emerging as the unabashed leader of this Movement of Radical Moderates and she doesn’t try to hide or mask her objectives: 1) separate the Republican Party from the Conservative Movement, 2) push the conservatives out and/or diminish their influence.    And she is succeeding to date. For that she deserves credit and respect. Respect for her intellect that is. Not her views.  For instance, in her recent address to the Log Cabin Republicans, she does correctly point out that the GOP and Conservatives are sitting around, “waiting for the other side to be perceived as worse than us”.   And that is absolutely true. The Movement Conservatives have become completely distracted.   Refusing to consider getting their own dysfunctional house in order but instead continuously harping and pointing their finger at the flawed, Constitution-hating democrats. They keep telling us what we already know rather than making an effort to fix our own problems. Of which they are in deep denial about. And many problems they do have, but honestly they are not insurmountable. However, their stubborn arrogance won’t allow them to even recognize that they have a problem. So they’ve become as a dog chasing its tail.  And Meghan, like most everyone else, can see this joke of a “GOP three ring circus”. It doesn’t take some political genius.   She sees it! Many of us see it. And to her credit she at least has the courage to try to offer up, with an element of passion, some Progressive solutions. She’s a progressive what else do you expect her to do?? Just so happens that her solutions (and those of others in her camp)  would finish the GOP for good. These “youthful” moderates may dominate the right Blogeshpere. They may be able to set up a Facebook page. They certainly know how to Twitter deep into the wee hours of the night. But, if left unchecked, they’ll finish the demolition job that John McCain started in 2008.   If Conservatives don’t “gently & lovingly” smack them down, these misguided progressives will drive away millions more of the 59.9 million that voted GOP on 11/4/08 and ruin any chance we might have of taking back one of the legislative houses on 11/2/10. Of which, for the sake of our Nation, we desperately need to do.   So, who are these “Old School Republicans” that Meghan proclaimed as “Scared S**tless”? They used to be called Reagan Democrats.   Now they are the 59.9 million Civic Conservatives   who held their nose and pulled the GOP lever on 11/4/08. Surely not voting “for” her progressive Dad but rather voting “against” the socialist Barrack Obama. And lets not forget about the 10-20 million who opted to “Stay at Home” rather than compromise their principles.   Meghan is correct about one thing, however. They are scared. But not for themselves because, you see, they’ve made their pot of gold!   They are scared for the future of Meghan and her fellow Gen Y’ers because of the destructive course these youngsters have set our Nation upon. Installing at the highest level of our government one who will punish achievers/producers, take the wealth they’ve earned and give it to the non-producers of not only our society but throughout the world.   And one who will incrementally push our Constitution aside and replace it with the charter of some world governing body.  Meghan says we Old School’ers want to, “cling to past successes”. Here’s where she show’s her serious lack of maturity. Certainly it makes perfect sense to “cling” to traditions and values that have worked for millennia. Truth transcends the generations but these Gen Y’ers, in their arrogance, believe that they have evolved to some higher plane of consciousness and have gained some unique higher knowledge.   Hence, they’ve concluded, that these traditions/values that have served mankind well over the centuries, no longer apply to them. They, of course, are tragically wrong and will pay a heavy and painful high price. If this mentality begins to control the Republican Party, to put it simply, Old School Republicans will flee the party by the millions.   And they will not be replaced by some hyped-up, puffed-up, overrated youth vote.   These radical moderates are loose cannons on a rolling deck, encouraged and coached by an exultant MSM. Certainly they have moderate views but what makes them extreme is this; they are absolutely enthralled with what comes out of their own mouth.   “Hooked” and enticed by the attention they receive from the media. They’re in awe of their opinions and see themselves as messianic. Viewing themselves as some great leader holding the torch and pointing the way for the huddled masses. And they’re dangerous because, in essence, they are so very wrong-headed.   Next to the road they’re telling us we should travel upon there’s a tattered sign that reads “Bridge Out Ahead”. Yet they continue pointing the way and, as a result, many mindless followers within the lazy GOP Hierarchy convince themselves that this is the correct path-of-least-resistance to take. Hence the momentum builds for this Movement, in its infancy, of Radical Moderates. I have feared for a long time that the vacuum caused by the total void of leadership within the GOP would eventually suck in something impure. Meghan’s Moderates seem to be that void filling contamination. Those on the right, such as Laura Ingraham, who believe the best way to deal with a force like Meghan McCain is to make fun of her dress size….well they have blundered seriously.   Meghan has brilliantly turned it around on them resulting in Ingraham and other conservative talkers drawing back a bloody stump, in shock. They’ve been made to look small as Meghan swings her substantial mallet and drives the divisive wedge still deeper between Conservatives and the Republican Party.   Those who oppose Meghan McCain had best learn do so strictly on an intellectual level and cease with the childish name calling.    Darvin Dowdy                                       

Remember this ad? Various versions of this were run against McCain, as well as Republican Congressmen like Chris Shays. And were quite effective I may add,

When he took office Obama used the old doom and gloom approach to railrod passage of his trillion dollar "stimulus" plan  even though some observers suggested it would backfire.

But at least it was consistent with his campaign rhetoric that the prior administration had ruined everything.

Words have consequences, and it's hard to improve consumer confidence with doom and gloom (my read on the minimal improvement here and the stock rally is people expected Bank of America and Citi to have failed already, and are relieved that they didn;t).

So, now

If we are keeping focused on all of the fundamentally sound aspects of our economy, all the outstanding companies, workers, all of the innovation and dynamism in this economy then we're going to get through this," Obama said. "I'm very confident about that." 

See, whn John McCain said the economy was fundamentally sound he was clueless. When Barack Obama says it--well it's because he's optimistic.

Even Obama's 2008 supporters think he's selling fake sunshine . Hope is a free good; money and credit, alas, are not.. Nor are credibility and consistency  of much value in ObamaWorld.

John McCain and Richard Shelby come to their senses:

John McCain and Richard Shelby, two high-profile Republican senators, said Sunday that the government should allow a number of the biggest U.S. banks to fail.

"Close them down, get them out of business," Shelby, the senior Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, said on the ABC television program "This Week With George Stephanopoulos." "If they're dead, they ought to be buried."

While the Alabama senator did not say which banks should shut down, he suggested that Citigroup might be on that list, saying the bank has "always been a problem child."

McCain, appearing on "Fox News Sunday," echoed that sentiment without identifying banks. McCain, who lost the U.S. presidential election in November, accused the Treasury Department of avoiding the "hard decision" to let "these banks fail."

All I have to say is, what in sand hill took you people sooooooo long?  Senator McCain, had you said this last September you'd currently be President and Barack Obama would still be some random Senator.

And yes, before the peddlers of haterade chime in, it's called CREATIVE DESTRUCTION.

Lessons Learned

After completing Parts One and Two about how Pennsylvania's two major metropolitan areas are shifting politically, there are some lessons we can learn from the past election.

Republicans have precious few areas where they can run up large margins.  One thing I consistently found looking at municipal level data across two divergent metropolitan areas is a lack of high population areas that Republicans dominate.  It is true that Republicans excel in some areas.  But they are either sparsely populated rural areas or exurban developments without significant population yet.  By contrast, Democrats can count on many highly populated places to give them large margins.  Democrats have traditionally been the party of the cities, so it is no surprise that they run up huge vote totals there.  Republicans were traditionally able to counter this by similarly large rural margins, and impressive suburban totals.  These days however, the ability for Republicans to win big votes in the suburbs isn't there.

The Pittsburgh and Philadelphia areas are stand-ins for two types of political regions and how their politics are shifting.  The Philadelphia area represents the swing of the college-educated and non-whites towards Democrats.  The same phenomenon has happened in Northern Virginia, Long Island, suburban Chicago, St. Louis County, and even Orange County.  If you wonder why Republicans are shut out nationally, it is because their candidates are receiving 45 percent of the vote in Nassau County, 40 percent in Fairfax County, and 42 percent in Dallas County.  McCain barely broke 50 percent in Orange County, the living embodiment of Reagan's America!

The Pittsburgh area represents the swing of non-college educated whites towards Republicans.  Western Pennsylvania is an ancillary part of the one section of the country that has moved towards Republicans, the Interior South.  Western Pennsylvania is quite obviously not part of the South, and most of the areas I described in Part Two wouldn't be classified as part of Appalachia (I left those counties out).  But it does share some cultural affinities with the South.  After all, who was Obama talking about when he made his "bitter clinger" speech?  He should have known that even prosperous suburbanites in suburban Pittsburgh go hunting.  This countercyclical direction reminds me of Western Pennsylvania's turn towards national Democrats such as Mondale and Dukakis, even as they were getting slaughtered nationwide.

What is really disquieting for the future is that, at least in 2008, the Republican Party is on the losing side of demographic change.  On paper, you would prefer to have the Philadelphia Metro area swinging your way rather than the Pittsburgh Metro area coming your way.  Part of this preference is based upon the Philadelphia area's greater diversity.  Compare the non-white population in each of these counties in 2000:

Philadelphia Metro:

• Delaware County: 21.2%
• Montgomery County: 15.6%
• Bucks County: 12.5%
• Chester County: 14.5%

Pittsburgh Metro:

• Allegheny County: 16.5%
• Westmoreland County: 3.9%
• Butler County: 2.8%
• Washington County: 5.3%
• Beaver County: 8.2%

Keep in mind that in the interceding nine years, these percentages have only increased in Metro Philadelphia, and have not declined in Metro Pittsburgh.  The era of monolithically white suburbs not only is over, but has been over for some time.  The Republican Party has not adapted to that reality.  It has only been able to keep pace in areas with little diversity.  By some measures, the Pittsburgh area has the lowest percentage of Hispanics of any major metropolitan area in the country.  My high school, right north of the city limits of Pittsburgh, was 95 percent white.  A similar school in suburban Philadelphia would certainly have more minorities.

In the Philadelphia area, the Republican Party does best with those who are middle-class and above.  This is to say that once you reach a certain income level, roughly $50,000 household income in 2000, income cannot predict how you will vote.  There is great fluctuation between different communities, with some municipalities at a certain income level casting 60 percent of their votes for McCain and others giving him 30 percent.  A better way to view the Republican Party in the Philadelphia area is to view it as the The Party of the Periphery, only strong in semi-rural areas outside most suburban development.

In the Pittsburgh area, the Republican Party is strongest with the upper-middle class.  Western Pennsylvania follows a more traditional pattern where the more money you have, generally the more likely you are to be Republican.  It is not quite as steep a divide as it would have been 50 years ago and rich areas like Fox Chapel are immune to this, but Pittsburgh's suburban bourgeoisie is instinctively Republican.  In Allegheny County, McCain earned over 60 percent of the vote in the following municipalities: Pine Township, Sewickley Heights, Richland Township, Marshall Township, Franklin Park, and Bradford Woods.  With the exception of wealthy Sewickley Heights, these areas are all certainly upper-middle class.  They are also all adjoining to each other, part of either the North Allegheny or Pine-Richland School Districts in the North Hills.  Compare them to communities of similar incomes in the Philadelphia area; for instance, the municipalities making up the Council Rock School District.  The five municipalities that comprise Council Rock gave McCain the following percentages: 57 percent, 53 percent, 46 percent, 52 percent, and 43 percent.  While a series of neighboring communities in the Pittsburgh area votes more or less the same, a similar set of communities in suburban Philadelphia show little coherence in their voting patterns.

There is not one simple strategy for Republicans to reconnect with Pennsylvania voters.  Some think that the party needs to moderate on social issues, because they are killing GOP prospects in moderate suburbs.  In the case of the Philadelphia suburbs, I think this is true.  But outside of Southeastern Pennsylvania, Republican stands on social issues gain more votes than they lose.  Pennsylvania is a very open state on cultural issues, with any non-radical/reactionary approach being electorally viable.  Similarly, some conservatives advocate a move towards a very populist Republican Party that has no truck for "elites".  It would be a mass movement of "the people", meaning non-educated professionals.  This also wouldn't help, as it would finish off the Republican Party in the Philadelphia area while perhaps reversing the Republican advantage among Pittsburgh suburbanites.  A Republican Party that draws its base more narrow will only create a larger Democratic Party.  A Republican Revival is not a simple matter of ditching issues or eschewing certain constituencies.

What I take out of the past election is that the traditional shape of Pennsylvania politics is gone.  For over a century, Chester County was part of any winning Republican coalition.  The idea that a Republican could lose Chester County and even be remotely competitive would've been fanciful.  Likewise, since the New Deal, Beaver County was part of a Democratic winning coalition.  Only perceived radicals like McGovern could prevent residents from punching their tickets for Democrats.  But traditonal allegiances have been shed.  It seems as though certain groups of people can never be part of the same party in a two-party system (The South and New England have never been together in any party system).  Now, the Republican Party in Pennsylvania has gone from being the party of The Philadelphia Story to the party of The Deerhunter.