Much has been made of Senator McCain’s frustrating inability (or was it an unwillingness) in the first Presidential debate to go after Senator Obama and the Democrats with respect to the current credit crisis.
Is McCain holding back, waiting for the proper moment to drop these precision bombs? Or is he truly so “collegial” that he can’t bring himself to break from the bi-partisan “maverick” image of himself he’s constructed and cultivated (and which, until he presumed to run for President against a media-chosen Democrat and so was turned into freedom’s enemy and a Bush retread, made him something of a media darling) — something that Ric Locke has suggested repeatedly in the comments here.
For your consideration, then, are two competing views — the first from Jimmie at Sundries Shack, the second from Robert Stacy McCain (no relation) of the Washington Times. First, here’s Jimmie, who asks, “Is John McCain Putting Country in Front of Campaign Again?”
I saw McCain’s performance during the debate and it baffled me why he wasn’t more aggressive toward Obama on the bailout question. It’s not as if he didn’t have plenty of ammunition to hammer Obama on the contributions he’s taken from the GSEs, his taking advice from two corrupt former Fannie Mae CEOs, his party’s shameless protection of the GSEs even as they drove us to this very crisis, and the blatant conflict of interest inherent in having Chris Dodd and Barney Frank write huge swaths of the bailout legislation. And it’s driven such folks as Ann Althouse to say today that, because of his campaign’s rather lackluster work in the media this weekend, he has “no real insight about our financial market issues and no political courage in offering a solutionâ€Â.
I don’t think that’s true in McCain’s case, but, still, you can’t blame folks for thinking that at this point. So why didn’t he bury Obama in a steaming pile of his own hypocrisy? […]
The answer […] is that he pulled his punches on Obama and the Democrats for the same reason he suspended his campaign and went back to Washington. John McCain cares a whole lot more for the welfare of the country than he does his Presidential campaign.
[…]
It’s no secret that most of the principles involved in the bailout talks on the Democratic side are a bunch of vain, petty, politically scummy individuals. First, there’s Nancy Pelosi, who slammed the Republicans for not showing up to a meeting to which they had never been invited. Then there’s Harry Reid who first begged John McCain to come back to Washington, then, when it seemed that the political winds were at McCain’s back if he came back, tried to order him to stay home. Of course there’s the Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dum/Tweedle Dummer trio of Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, and Barney Frank about whom I’ve written already. This is not a group who takes being savaged on national television particularly well.
Consider also that the bailout is not a done deal. The word is that there likely won’t even be a vote until at least Wednesday. There is still plenty of time for shenanigans from the Democratic leadership.
Let’s say that McCain had come out and taken a brickbat to the Democratic leadership for their 15 years of avarice that’s led us to the brink of meltdown. Let’s say that he gave us chapter and verse on ACORN and the Democrats who, even this weekend, were trying to cut them in on a piece of the action. Let’s say that Johnny Mac broke bad on the Obamessiah and got him good and fired up. Do you really think that we wouldn’t see Democrats walking away from any reasonable negotiations and toward the friendly television cameras to complain about how the “mean-spirited†John McCain cast a pall over the whole deal and that they just can’t negotiate in good faith with such a polarizing figure? It’d take two weeks just to coax them out of their sullen pouts and petty revenge schemes.
Were I John McCain, I’d consider the likelihood that Pelosi, Reid, and the gang might box the deal to score a few more political points and exact a little revenge a non-trivial concern. It would be prudent for him to hold his tongue until the deal is really done.
[…] it’s worth considering that the real reason we haven’t seen the pugnacious John McCain this weekend is because he’s decided, at the risk of his campaign, to be the adult here. This bailout deal is important to him, more important than a few points in the polls and more important than taking the opportunity to savage his opponent.
If what Jimmie surmises is true, the strategy for McCain becomes one of how to deflect blame away from Republicans (Americans believe, at a 2-1 clip, that the GOP is responsible for a mess that is, quite clearly, the result of Democrat policy and a failure to admit to problems facing Fannie and Freddie, choosing instead to grandstand against attempts at reform introduced by both President Bush and, later, John McCain) while remaining collegial enough not to alienate the fractious and completely partisan motivated Democrats so that a deal can be put together that would take into consideration the concerns of fiscal conservatives and taxpayers.
Under this description, McCain is, politically speaking, operating in the best interests of conservatives, whose votes he already has fairly well sewn up (thanks to the astounding and unapologetic leftism of his opponent); that he is also operating in the best interests of the country is likewise true as well, and may in fact be his motivation. Still, from a political calculus, his efforts appealed to conservatives and tried to bridge the gap between conservative wants and Democrat control of passage — the Democrats wanting nothing more, really, than more money for their pet funds and political cover should the bailout turn disastrous.
Alternately — and Jimmie alludes to this when he references the Althouse piece — what we could be seeing is nothing more than McCain’s deficiencies brought into sharp relief. Argues Stacy McCain:
Jimmie points out that Maverick had plenty of ammunition to hit Obama and the Democrats on the financial crisis, and didn’t use it.
That’s one possible explanation. The other explanation — and far more likely, in my mind — is that John McCain has never been good at partisan politics.
He’s always happiest when denouncing fellow Republicans, especially on domestic policy. He’s never been good at the culture-warrior stuff and he himself admits he doesn’t understand economics. He is not a limited-government conservative.
Thus, for Crazy Cousin John to lay into Obama and the Democrats for their abuses of the Community Reinvestment Act and their contributions from Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac would be completely out of character for him. He is clearly a man who believes all that civics-textbook crap about “bipartisanship” and this belief makes him a very bad candidate in the kind of trench-warfare politics that the Democrats specialize in.
Stacy has a point here: after all, Senator McCain got his “maverick” image — bestowed upon him by a press who still uses Andrew Sullivan (2004 endorsement: John Kerry; 2008 endorsement: Barack Obama) as a “go-to conservative,” whenever Pat Buchanan isn’t around to dish out some raw nativism — for being willing not to buck Democrats, but rather publically to go after his own party.
Still, Senator McCain is no longer being managed solely by the McCain self-image, and so it is fair to surmise that, at least to a degree, his personal sense of honor would direct him to heed to counsel of the party advisers who helped back his candidacy. Which is why I believe that, at some point, names will get named, and the “collegiality” of the McCain campaign might take a turn toward the, well, pointed.
What both Jimmie and Stacy fail to take into account, though, is this: since the GOP convention, the McCain campaign strategy has been to sit back and allow Obamaco to go after Governor Palin, and in doing so, drawing inadvertent parallels between Obama and Palin such that McCain is left looking more “presidential” solely for his having been able to remain above the fray.
Which is why it is possible — and here, time will tell — that the same strategy is being planned now with respect to the economic crisis: once a deal is finalized, it will be Governor Palin who goes on the attack, drawing connections, naming names, and generally pinning to Democrats the litany of their failures, cover-ups, obstructionism, and dubious connections.
Seeing as how Palin inflames the leftwing base (not to mention the right “intelligensia” — though the latter is less important in the scheme of things), the strategy could be let Palin go on the attack with facts and figures, then let the media (in the bag for Obama), the leftwing pundits, and the progressive base go on yet another wilding — another round of snobbery, elitism capped by the mainstreaming of trailerpark jokes — all while McCain sits back once again decrying the hatred and venom of the Obamabots.
Such a strategy would have a twofold impact, if in fact the gamble that Palin can regain form and pull it off proves successful (and that isn’t at all certain, given how many conservative pundits have worked to position themselves for the ticket’s failure by jumping ship on the Governor): first, it would reaffirm Palin as tough, unafraid, and able to take criticism while showing McCain to be a collegial statesman; and second, it would reveal, yet again, the bitter elitism of the Democratic base, which is precisely what irked so many independents and undecideds in the wake of Palin’s being named VP candidate.
The final push, then, would be to use ads to solidify the connections drawn explicitly by Palin — while hoping that the defensiveness of the Donks paints them as petty, vindictive, and not ready to lead.
— Which would be ironic, given that the “temperament” issue was always supposed to hurt McCain.
Discuss.
FWIW…
Mav is an oooooooold Navy Attack pilot…If they can’t get the pipper on target during the first pass…
Then they execute another pass until they put the ordinance on target!
I was just as frustrated that he didn’t call O! and the other Dems on the protection of Fannie/Freddie and the CRA; especially since O! was around for the 2006 pass at greater regulation of those GSEs…
I know all eeeeeevil RethugliKKKans are jittery, but I gotta think that Mav kept his powder dry for a better opportunity…
The House vote on the bailout failed.
How will that affect the McCain machinations?
Continuing the attack pilot theme, there is currently a wall of flack coming from the target, since the anti-meltdown bill melted down.
Better to let a few more rounds get spent, go in, and make the attack a good one.
I’d certainly like to see her try this — might learn something new about her — but while I trust Palin’s judgement and character, I’m not so sure she has the lawyerly, persuasive skills required for this mission.
Although Biden does look a bit like a trophy polar bear.
BTW-It looks like the bailout bill has failed *shudder*, who knows what that means, but the Wall street types have shifted into hand-wringing overdrive!
And, CNBC and their crew of uber-objective, MSNBC-type, talking heads are trumpeting the fact that, of course, the eeeeeeeeeeeeeevil McSame RethugliKKKans are to blame for this…SHOCKAH!
Meanwhile, they have some deep pockets guy reminding these clowns that there are FDIC mechanisms, like those that have been employed for WAMU and Wachovia, which could work without congress layin’ the big coin out…
IMHO-Although it’s ugly, the house should’a passed it for the good of the country…
We can all thank Ms. Pelosi for her delightful anti-RethugliKKKan diatribe just prior to the vote; what a way to win friends and influence people!
That botox must have damaged her brain…
Heh. I’d also like to see Biden and Obama try to beat up a girl.
I like your theory. But Maverick is still going to need to pin O!’s ears back on this at the next debate. If he does, and Jimmie is right then good on him. If he doesn’t and Stacy is right, he neither wants nor deserves to win.
The Demorats, O! chief among them, are not being collegial, they”re playing hardball and they’re lying. Palin can go attack dog on it, but Maverick needs to drop it in O!’s lap himself.
Mav needs to call on any wingmen he has, to twist some arms and get the bill passed…
Now they’re saying no vote again today; they want to assess the situation…
Translation: They and their MSM fear-mongering pals are really gonna bash the eeeeeeeevil obstructionist RethugliKKKans hard!; and essentially blame them for the -533 dow…
I actually think it’s got a lot more to do with what Rick Moran had to say, and a little to do with what Jimmie said. I think that McCain probably wanted to hammer Obama on this issue, and expose him for the hypocritical elitist wonk that he is. However, there were two main problems. One, was mentioned by Jimmie. The second, mentioned by Rick, is that America has already made up their mind that this was caused by “8 years of Bush leadership and Republican backed deregulation.” They ‘know what they know’ and no amount of facts is going to change that. To attempt to set the record straight, while currying favor with the conservative base, would do little more than put him at odds with the majority of the public on a critical issue.
Personally, since I don’t necessarily fully take on Jimmie’s view — the Democrats couldn’t fully play partisan politics with this as the death of this bill would be death by Democrat, as they had the votes to pass it and did not need Republican support — I really wish McCain would have gone after Obama. I wish he wouldn’t have mentioned s.190. I wish he would have mentioned the donations from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into Obama’s pockets. I wish he would have pushed Obama’s associations with ACORN. I wish he would have talked about the Democrats blocking Bush’s attempts at oversight in 2003.
Maybe it wouldn’t have changed peoples minds, but it would have had the press and Obama on the defensive and, at least a few people out there may have actually hit up google after being bombarded with information they had likely never head before.
MoveOn has gone on the attack against McCain painting him as intimately bound up in the failure of Fannie/Freddie and the current credit crisis in TV ads today. While chock full of lying implications, the ad will nevertheless be hard-hitting with people generally ignorant of the facts.
As a consequence, I can’t see how the McCain campaign can avoid hitting back.
Let’s say that Johnny Mac broke bad on the Obamessiah and got him good and fired up. Do you really think that we wouldn’t see Democrats walking away from any reasonable negotiations and toward the friendly television cameras to complain about how the “mean-spirited†John McCain cast a pall over the whole deal and that they just can’t negotiate in good faith with such a polarizing figure?
I think just the opposite. Congress is at about a 10% approval rating now and still the most arrogant and unreasonable bunch of assholes on the planet. A pole-axe handle right between the eyes couldn’t hurt.
B Moe: “I think just the opposite. Congress is at about a 10% approval rating now and still the most arrogant and unreasonable bunch of assholes on the planet. A pole-axe handle right between the eyes couldn’t hurt.”
As one talker put it, Congressional approval is down to paid staff and blood relatives.
Personally, since I don’t necessarily fully take on Jimmie’s view  the Democrats couldn’t fully play partisan politics with this as the death of this bill would be death by Democrat, as they had the votes to pass it and did not need Republican support  I really wish McCain would have gone after Obama.
I think that today may actually strengthen my theory. Nancy Pelosi’s egregious speech set this entire effort back and singlehandedly undid a week of negotiations. McCain’s entire take on this right now ought to be, “The Democrats blame Republicans for this, and yet even with the clear majority in both houses, couldn’t see their way to fix the problems. Is it because they couldn’t, or because they didn’t want to?”
Right now, the field is open for a little righteous indignation. Let’s see if he takes the opportunity.
Jeff, thank you for the commentary. To be perfectly honest, I’m not in love with my own theory and I think that both you and Robert have very good points that I can’t quite reckon. One of the reasons I still don’t fully support John McCain is that I just don’t know what’s going on in his head.
I think that today may actually strengthen my theory.
You may be right. It’s near political suicide, at least in my mind, for McCain not to fire back at this point. Accepting the attacks, without setting the record straight, will be seen as a tacit acceptance of the message being put forth by Pelosi and the Democrats.
With the way the McCain’s campaign numbers are going, honestly, what do they have to lose?
[quote]One of the reasons I still don’t fully support John McCain is that I just don’t know what’s going on in his head.[/quote]
I fully support John McCain ‘only’ because anything less is a boon to O!. Make no mistake, I’m in the camp of “anything to make sure O! doesn’t get elected” far more than I’m in the camp of “Get John McCain elected.”
One of the reasons I still don’t fully support John McCain is that I just don’t know what’s going on in his head.
You said a mouthful right there.
I think there might be a very simple explanation for not laying things on the line during the debate–it was billed as a debate on foreign policy and defense, not economics or financial shenanigans. With all the fact-checkers ready to pounce, McCain would be foolish to risk “naming name” unless he had his ducks fully and completely in a row, which I doubt was the case.
I think it’s a little of both, with Jeff’s third “Palin-option” thown in for good measure.
The thing I’m wondering is, who are these independents? Are they middle-class home-owners, or third year college students with a sampling of econ 101 under their belts? Are they single guys with pregnant girlfriends living in duplexes in the burbs, or are they married wife-traders with governmemt jobs?
I don’t know any, so it’s hard to get into their minds.
I’d like to insert another curl into the “Bail-Out” debate here, too: namely, what effect will a radical depreciation of the real estate market have on local municipalities?
Most local governments rely on property taxes to fund schools, fire-fighting districts and the mayosl hair-stylists. If property values plummet nation-wide, how will the local schoolhouse fund its next “Hair-Lice Removal Program,” or its updated, more politically-correct text-book purchases?
Put another way, once the drain gets pulled, will the rubber ducky get sucked down the bath-tub drain, too?
I wrote “mayosl?!!”
It should read “Mayor’s hair-stylists.” I’m drinking a nice Australian Shiraz early today to numb the angst of today’s political news. Second glass away!
Sorry for the typo’s, guys.
The McCain-Palin website has yet to post its first reaction to the failure of the TARP bill in the House today. Nothing. Nothing at all hours after the event. Nothing.
Why is that hard? I admit it’s a bit of an exercise, but still —
Supposed you believed, honestly, sincerely, down-at-the-bottom-of-your soul believed, that your colleagues were honest public servants — that they sometimes disagreed with you because they had different visions of what was best for their constituents and the country as a whole, but those different visions were based on knowledge, honest belief, and the desires of the people who elected them. What would your policy and attitude be?
Collegiality and compromise, right? Nancy Pelosi wants things because that’s what her constituents want and sent her to Congress to get. Your constituents sent you to Washington to get different things. The right thing to do is horsetrade, trying to give Nancy’s constituents as much of what they want as possible while not depriving your own, and you expect that she feels the same way about your constituents.
That’s our Maverick. Senator Charlie Brown, hoping to be President Charlie Brown. Hell, the damned Democrats ought to be out campaigning for him — on the record, they’d get more goodies, and more fun, yanking the football and laughing uproariously when he falls on his butt.
Don’t get me wrong — I’ll vote for him, although it’ll be with a motion-sickness patch behind my ear and all fingers crossed. Obama is a disaster looking for a time and place to happen.
Regards,
Ric
#5 Bob Reed:
Indeed. If you want a deal to go through you don’t call the other party a bunch of twisty-spined skunks before they ink it. So either Rep. Pelosi wanted to kill this or she is as dumb as a box of rocks.
There is the line about not attributing to malice what is explained by stupidity, and…with Rep. Pelosi I wonder if malicious stupidity isn’t the best answer.
#20 Ric Locke:
I don’t often disagree with you, but after all the years that Sen. McCain has spent in politics, I would be surprised if he didn’t have a dismal opinion of most of his colleagues. I think an argument could be made that he knows that and accepts it – not because he thinks it is good, but because it is. And working with what you got to work with he has tried to do what he thinks is best for the country.
I may not agree with him at times, but I think he has a pretty good idea of humans at this point. Charlie Brown or Pollyanna – no, I can’t quite accept that.
Supposed you believed, honestly, sincerely, down-at-the-bottom-of-your soul believed, that your colleagues were honest public servants  that they sometimes disagreed with you because they had different visions of what was best for their constituents and the country as a whole, but those different visions were based on knowledge, honest belief, and the desires of the people who elected them.
My problem, Ric, is that if McCain still believes that after 36(?) years on the Hill then I think the daft bastard needs to be in a padded cell, not the Oval Office. There is simply no way he could be that naive.
“Charlie Brown or Pollyanna – no, I can’t quite accept that.”
Ahh, but remember though, Mikey, we’re talking about a guy who put the NYT’s primary endorsement up on his website as if it was something to be proud of.
Thing I want to know is this: if he allows the Dems and his pals in the MSM to hang this around the Republicans’ necks, in contradiction of historical reality — and if he fails to go after the Messiah on this, that’s exactly what will result — well, how does allowing Obama to coast into the White House on the coattails of a lie believed by 2/3rds of Americans help the country he’s supposedly putting first, exactly?
I’m sorry Mike, but I can’t quite agree with you on that. I find it hard to believe that someone with such a grasp of foreign affairs – has a ‘Kipling’s World’ grasp of them – turns almost 180 degrees when seeing domestic politicians after such a long span of years. Especially after he saw what was coming and tried to stop it.
As for your question, we will see within a week whether your assesment or mine is correct.
The cognitive dissonance on this just can’t last. I mean, the Republicans are now being criticized as the ones who , because of their close ties to Wall Street and their profligate ways, caused this crisis while simultaneously being criticized for failing to get all profligate and bail out their BFF cronies on Wall Street.
It really won’t take much to shatter that carefully crafted bit of crystalline transparency.
I can’t help but think that if McCain really wants to put country first he needs a strategy to WIN this election, not just get trampled in an effort to make things happen. Democrats are the majority party in Congress; and his own party’s leadership are bucking him. Plus once the narrative is set re: the bailout, it won’t be easy to change no matter how many members of the MSM Sarah Palin talks to in a week or two. Last week set the narrative: Greed and Republicans were to blame. John McCain did nothing to stop that. This meme will be as indelible now as “Bush lied” and will do our country just as great a disservice – greater, if it gets O! elected.
[…] from a strategic standpoint, the McCain campaign might have been waiting to use Sarah Palin as the key attack dog — the upshot being that she draws more elitist fire (jokes about breeder hicks seem to play […]
[…] Variations on a (Mavericky) theme […]