McCain and the Base

Filed under: 2008 elections — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on January 30, 2008 @ 5:40 pm CET

Joe Gandelman has a great post up about John McCain and the conservative base, who’s being led by conservative talk radio hosts. He writes:

Even though it’s clear McCain is winning despite the talkers’ opposition, the question becomes: could continued opposition from talkers cause some Republican voters to stay home in November?

This raises the prospect that McCain could be backed by many in the GOP establishment but face a mutiny in at least part of part of his party’s base, led by angry talk show hosts.

Several hosts had callers call in yesterday and say whether they would ever vote for McCain. Some were almost yelling when talking about the Arizona Senator and insisting they’d never EVER vote for him.

He goes on to write:

More likely than not, now that McCain won the Florida primary and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuilani is reportedly poised to pull out of the race and endorse him (sparking speculation Rudy might be McCain’s Veep or server in a McCain cabinet) many in the Republican establishment will gravitate behind McCain…particularly if he stacks up some convincing victories on Super Tuesday.

I have to say: I’m getting the impression that many conservatives truly won’t vote for the guy, not even if his opponent is Hillary Clinton. Sure, most of them talk a lot, but will vote nonetheless, but in American elections, it’s all about getting the base active and getting out the vote. If you don’t succeed completely in that, you’ve got no chance of winning.

As I see it, McCain won’t be able to get out the base.

As Joe writes:

McCain is arousing ideological-based passions on the party’s right. Indeed, the anger, the vows never to support him, sarcasm and fury seem similar to 1968 when then Vice President Hubert Humphrey got the Democratic Presidential nomination and many of the Democrats’ anti-war left, followers of then Senator Eugene McCarthy, and followers of assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy, angrily refused to support Humphrey.

There is a PERSONAL and an IDEOLOGICAL opposition to McCain within his own party. And there are no signs of it diminishing among the true believers on the party’s right.

The reality is that many conservatives believe that McCain has purposefully angered them in the past, and perhaps even enjoys doing so. They feel that he doesn’t respect, let alone appreciate them. And that’s why they won’t vote for the guy.

And if they do, they’ll be holding their nose. And that’s a bad, a very bad thing. If you want to win, you’ve got to inspire the base. The base shouldn’t hold its nose, it should be the strongest supporter of all.

It’s a fascinating development. I think that Florida made the wrong choice, but personally I’m often in agreement with McCain on many issues (even the tests I recently conducted show that McCain is probably the candidate I agree most with). Keeping the coalition together is important, and I don’t think that McCain can do so. Or, if he can, the coalition won’t be passionate.

In a way it’s sad actually. The conservative base can make clear it doesn’t agree with McCain on certain issues, but he’s a good politician, with a long record of service to his people. Don Surber puts it quite well:

Of more importance is that McCain has been vetted by the electorates of 3 states and he has proved his mettle.

He has baggage, true, but he has proved himself able to carry his own baggage.

You win some, you lose some. You keep playing the game.

Now is a time of wound licking and soul searching for most Republicans. McCain did not win a majority of the vote. He is not the first choice for most among Republicans. But neither was Lincoln.

Like his style or not (I don’t), like his policy views or not (I do), but he’s tested and he has overcome the odds. Romney outspent him 8-1 in Florida. If you outspend someone 8-1 but lose, well, you didn’t deserve to win either.

A question we need to ask: will McCain be able to raise the money needed to compete against the Democratic nominee?

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or willfully misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid use of vulgar language as well as racial, ethnic, or religious slurs.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim) or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email.

1 sideliner

January 30, 2008 @ 6:54 pm CET

I’m a member of the opposite side’s phenomenon: I won’t vote for Hillary, regardless. Just can’t do it. Can’t vote for McCain’s irresponsible views either.

I wonder which group of sitter outers is bigger?

2 abrisaham

January 31, 2008 @ 4:09 am CET

Barrak Obama’s followers will be much less likely to vote for Hillary then Hillary’s followers will for Barak Obama. That is because I am seeing the new catch phrases popping up more and more and they are almost always attibuted to Obama supporters.

Clintonistas.
Operatives
Henchmen

It is but the beginning of the assault that George Bush had to go thru for 4 long years led by the very moderate, centrist, lets all get along Barak Obama supporters.

I do not mean to imply that Barak Obama encourages this. he does not. Those putting him on their shoulders and running to the throne room do however. It is what they are good at. Character assassination worked to perfection.

Now they are doing it to Hillary. The once Mythical figure of Bill Clinton is now being portrayed as some great evil standing in the way of their rightful throne.

How sad has the democratic party become that we can no longer even have an open and honest debate. I do not mind disagreements and spats and tiffs and downright squabbles over policy or who is right for the job. But the far left attack dogs are just tuning up. The democratic party can only hope that Obama or Clinton are trounced on super tuesday. Otherwise its going to be a long and ugly march to the convention.