Why does Talk Radio dislike McCain?

[August1991]

On a key issue of America's might in the world, McCain is a dream candidate. This guy is not for turning. On Iraq and Afghanistan, McCain has made it abundantly clear that he's not going to cut and run. (God, think of his life and imprisonment in Hanoi.)

So why, on this critical issue, is the anti-Islamist, pseudo-Canadian Mark Steyn a contra-McCain?

HH: It’s Thursday, and we’re very lucky to begin this Thursday, as we do on most Thursdays, with Columnist to the World, Mark Steyn, author of America Alone. Mark, what did you think of last night’s debate?

MS: I was incredibly unimpressed by John McCain. You always hope his primary victories might bring out the more graceful side of him. But in fact, he seemed rather sort of small and mean in his general outlook last night.

Hugh Hewitt

I have to admit that I don't know who Hugh Hewitt is. I learned about him through Mark Steyn. While I knew of Rush Lumbah by name, I first heard them on the radio this past December 2007 - Christmas - while driving in Georgia (in the US south). IMHO, Lumbah and Hewitt are both populists but IMHO, Hewitt was more "honest". Lumbah was a caricature - he speaks carefully to say and repeat what people want to hear. He speaks like Duplessis. Hewitt is different.

Yet all these pundits dislike McCain. Why?

I think it's vanity. These pundits are vain. They didn't predict McCain winning (now or in 2000) and their vanity has been injured. So, they'll stick with Romney or even choose Clinton or Obama if it means defeating a Republican (McCain) that they didn't predict.

If Clinton/Barama wins (and McCain loses), these pundits (Steyn, Hewitt, Lumbagh) were right. For them, c'est la politique du pire.

Why is Talk Radio (the so-called base) against McCain?

Edited February 2, 2008 by August1991

[jdobbin]

Why is Talk Radio (the so-called base) against McCain?

It isn't just Talk Radio. Listen to FOX commentators as well. One or two have said they will vote for Clinton before they will vote for McCain. Many think he is too liberal.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327605,00.html

HANNITY: You'd vote for Hillary —

COULTER: I will campaign for her if it's McCain.

HANNITY: If Hillary is watching tonight, you just got an endorsement —

And so it has gone all week.

Edited February 2, 2008 by jdobbin

[August1991]

It isn't just Talk Radio. Listen to FOX commentators as well. One or two have said they will vote for Clinton before they will vote for McCain. Many think he is too liberal.

I just saw the Ann Coulter YouTube clip.

She really doesn't like McCain.

[BubberMiley]

McCain aligned with Ted Kennedy for his amnesty plan for illegal aliens.

For the first three years of the Iraq war, McCain spoke often about its poor planning and overall mismanagement.

McCain is contemptuous of the Christian right and has made his position known.

McCain is for campaign finance reform.

McCain negotiated with the Democrats to join their party in 2001 and negotiated with Kerry to be his running mate in 2004. They see him as a Republican of convenience and not a real Republican.

[scribblet]

Agreed, I've heard a few comments on talk shows (I'm down south right now), they do not see him as a

republican, he should be a democrat in their eyes. From what I've read I tend to agree, he certainly espouses the democratic platform.

Apart from that, don't you think he's a bit long in the tooth for the job, especially if it turns into 8 years?

[BubberMiley]

Apart from that, don't you think he's a bit long in the tooth for the job, especially if it turns into 8 years?

I don't think he's any older than Reagan was.

But I forgot, he also was critical of Bush's tax cuts, saying it was historically unprecedented and irresponsible to be cutting taxes to the rich while starting a war.

McCain is also open to bipartisanship. Many conservatives prefer an us-or-them mentality, and consider liberals to be the enemy. Engaging with them is considered to be commiserating with the enemy and practically treason.

[bush_cheney2004]

....McCain is also open to bipartisanship. Many conservatives prefer an us-or-them mentality, and consider liberals to be the enemy. Engaging with them is considered to be commiserating with the enemy and practically treason.

All conservatives are not Republicans, and all Republicans are not so conservative. John McCain comes from a very long family line of the warrior class, more prone to despise politicians than embrace them on either side. Senator McCain would fit in well on this varied US president list, most of which occurred before talk radio's self advertised import:

Abraham Lincoln

Andrew Johnson

Ulysses Simpson Grant

Rutherford Birchard Hayes

James Abram Garfield

Chester Alan Arthur

Benjamin Harrison

William McKinley

Theodore Roosevelt

William Howard Taft

Warren Gamaliel Harding

Calvin Coolidge

Herbert Clark Hoover

Dwight David Eisenhower

Richard Milhous Nixon

Gerald Rudolph Ford

Ronald Wilson Reagan

George Herbert Walker Bush

George Walker Bush

[jdobbin]

She really doesn't like McCain.

Thanks for the clip. I have seen a few things from her and other commentators. They are showing no quarter for McCain and this is only going to get more vocal as the days pass. There are many on the right who have never liked McCain and they will either sit at home on election day or vote for someone else.

I personally like him although he sometimes looks old out there on the campaign trail. It is a tiring battle to fight day in, day out but he often looks worn out.

Edited February 2, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

I don't think he's any older than Reagan was.

Reagan was 69 when he was elected. McCain is 71 now and will turn 72 in August.

[August1991]

Reagan was 69 when he was elected. McCain is 71 now and will turn 72 in August.

72 is the new 69.

[BubberMiley]

72 is the new 69.

Sounds kinky.

[jdobbin]

72 is the new 69.

If McCain is to win, he will have to somehow appeal to people who normally vote Democrat like Reagan did or have faith in his conservative credentials like Reagan had with the Republican base. Right now, I haven't seen that type of support.

McCain has sort of become the default candidate for the Republicans for those who won't vote for a Mormon (at least according to some of the polls out there) and those who won't vote for Huckabee for a variety of reasons. While McCain might win the leadership, I think he has a lot of forces lined up against him in his own party.

Edited February 2, 2008 by jdobbin

[August1991]

If McCain is to win, he will have to somehow appeal to people who normally vote Democrat like Reagan did or have faith in his conservative credentials like Reagan had with the Republican base. Right now, I haven't seen that type of support.

The usual strategy is to appeal to the base during the primaries and then go mainstream during the fall campaign. (In Canada, the same strategy applies during leadership campaigns.)

This often causes problems of consistency.

McCain seems to have been fortunate because he never had to appeal to the base. He's well placed to run a fall campaign seeking the votes of the mainstream middle.

Bush Jnr and Snr initially ran as "compassionate conservatives" for a "kinder and gentler" America. Ford beat Reagan in 1976. Reagan won the nomination and the presidency in 1980 because of the Iran hostages and, as Reagan asked, "Are you better off now than four years ago?"

IOW, I don't think Americans elect hard-right Republicans for president. They prefer mainstream Republicans.

----

I happen to think that some of these rightwing pundits have an inflated sense of their own importance and it bothers them that they didn't predict McCain's nomination or that McCain seems to do his own thing. Dunno.

[jdobbin]

McCain seems to have been fortunate because he never had to appeal to the base. He's well placed to run a fall campaign seeking the votes of the mainstream middle.

Bush Jnr and Snr initially ran as "compassionate conservatives" for a "kinder and gentler" America. Ford beat Reagan in 1976. Reagan won the nomination and the presidency in 1980 because of the Iran hostages and, as Reagan asked, "Are you better off now than four years ago?"

IOW, I don't think Americans elect hard-right Republicans for president. They prefer mainstream Republicans.

----

I happen to think that some of these rightwing pundits have an inflated sense of their own importance and it bothers them that they didn't predict McCain's nomination or that McCain seems to do his own thing. Dunno.

I don't know that McCain will be able to run as a compassionate conservative if he wins the nomination and not expect a huge backlash on the right. You could be right that some of the pundits have an inflated sense of themselves. However, don't underestimate their ability to do damage to a candidate that they don't like.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't know that McCain will be able to run as a compassionate conservative if he wins the nomination and not expect a huge backlash on the right. You could be right that some of the pundits have an inflated sense of themselves. However, don't underestimate their ability to do damage to a candidate that they don't like.

Hmmm...why aren't the Democrats held to the same standard? Using such logic, Clinton will not have the support of the left. That we are still talking about a competitive 2008 general election after the "bumbling right" speaks volumes.

[kimmy]

Hmmm...why aren't the Democrats held to the same standard? Using such logic, Clinton will not have the support of the left. That we are still talking about a competitive 2008 general election after the "bumbling right" speaks volumes.

I think there is a widely held perception that much of the bumbling is confined to Bush and his circle, not the Republicans as a whole. I think that whoever wins the Republican nomination will be viewed as being sufficiently distant from Bush so as to not be held accountable for Bush's record.

Personally, at this point at least, I'm kind of excited about the next election. I'm starting to think McCain could be a really great leader. And I think both Clinton and Obama would make the election far more compelling than the duds the Democrats ran in the last 2 elections.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

I think there is a widely held perception that much of the bumbling is confined to Bush and his circle, not the Republicans as a whole. I think that whoever wins the Republican nomination will be viewed as being sufficiently distant from Bush so as to not be held accountable for Bush's record.

This is folly, as even Senator Clinton is being held "accountable" for Bush's record (e.g. Iraq war vote) by her own party. Likely Republican nominee McCain is the heir apparent to Bush's foreign policy, and proudly announces his support even when the going got tough. This has great appeal to many in the middle.

Personally, at this point at least, I'm kind of excited about the next election. I'm starting to think McCain could be a really great leader. And I think both Clinton and Obama would make the election far more compelling than the duds the Democrats ran in the last 2 elections.

Those "duds" each were competitive in the general elections. The elections were compelling, and not intended as riveting entertainment for Canada.

[BubberMiley]

McCain has more reasons for Republicans to dislike him. He's pro-choice. He's a flip-flopper (anti-war/pro-war; anti-tax cuts/pro-tax cuts).

He's firmly against torture and gitmo. He's got as many veterans and POWs ready to swift-boat as Kerry had.

And he's easily rattled, prone to losing his temper, and known to be unstable (the Bush team didn't push-poll that in SC in 2000 for nothing).

I imagine a lot of conservatives might go for the more conservative Democrat if Clinton gets the nomination.

[bush_cheney2004]

...I imagine a lot of conservatives might go for the more conservative Democrat if Clinton gets the nomination.

Yes, that probably is your imagination. Change is good, except when it is bad.

[August1991]

McCain has more reasons for Republicans to dislike him. He's pro-choice. He's a flip-flopper (anti-war/pro-war; anti-tax cuts/pro-tax cuts).

He's firmly against torture and gitmo. He's got as many veterans and POWs ready to swift-boat as Kerry had.

And he's easily rattled, prone to losing his temper, and known to be unstable (the Bush team didn't push-poll that in SC in 2000 for nothing).

If this is the best criticsm that can be mounted against McCain, then I'd say that he'll have an easy walk to the Electoral College.

What will the radical American left do when it doesn't have Bushitler to kick around anymore?

----

On torture, McCain's position is understandable and it's also the right one. For the same reason, I don't think McCain is open to any swiftboating - he was a POW for five years for gawdsakes. All Prseidents since Nixon have lived with Roe vs Wade and frankly, the most that would happen is to return this to individual states for decision. While elections can sometimes be messy, I don't see McCain falling into an abortion trap.

McCain has taken a position on environmental protection that is not different from Nixon (who set up the EPA) and Bush Snr. It's also a position shared by many Americans.

On tax cuts, McCain gets to the true core issue of conservatives: cutting government spending. This, and McCain's position on the war on terrorism, put him clearly in the conservative camp.

Pundits like Mark Steyn or Anne Coulter don't have to get elected. They just have to attract enough attention to get a few media gigs.

Edited February 4, 2008 by August1991

[BubberMiley]

If this is the best criticsm that can be mounted against McCain, then I'd say that he'll have an easy walk to the Electoral College.

They are not criticism. They are important policy differences between McCain and Republicans.

On torture, McCain's position is understandable and it's also the right one. For the same reason, I don't think McCain is open to any swiftboating - he was a POW for five years for gawdsakes.

I agree it's the right position. My point, however, is that most Republicans don't. But the swiftboating is just getting started.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/AntiMcCain_v...ainst_0302.html

All Prseidents since Nixon have lived with Roe vs Wade and frankly, the most that would happen is to return this to individual states for decision. While elections can sometimes be messy, I don't see McCain falling into an abortion trap.

I agree he's too old to fall into an abortion trap, but no politician can stand on the fence on this one, and McCain doesn't. He's pro-choice, which, if you haven't been paying attention, is one of the most important issues among many Republicans, and he's on the wrong side.

On tax cuts, McCain gets to the true core issue of conservatives: cutting government spending. This, and McCain's position on the war on terrorism, put him clearly in the conservative camp.

Now if he can hold to positions on this issues, he won't be perceived as a typical Senate flip-flopper. Whether comments about staying in Iraq for 100 years gain him a winning plurality is hard to say. It certainly suggests he isn't the man to resolve that war.

What will the radical American left do when it doesn't have Bushitler to kick around anymore?

I'm not sure what this statement had to do with the topic, but I think the new forum rules explicitly prohibit calling him "Bushitler."

Edited February 4, 2008 by BubberMiley

[Carinthia]

The elections were compelling, and not intended as riveting entertainment for Canada.

Why are you so insulting and defensive towards Canadians BC? I can't help but wonder why you spend so much of your time on a Canadian forum. Sorry, but this has me puzzled.

[bush_cheney2004]

Why are you so insulting and defensive towards Canadians BC? I can't help but wonder why you spend so much of your time on a Canadian forum. Sorry, but this has me puzzled.

Take notes if you can't keep up in context. The response was directed at kimmy's:

"And I think both Clinton and Obama would make the election far more compelling than the duds the Democrats ran in the last 2 elections."

Why are some Canadians so "insulting and defensive" towards Americans?

How I choose to spend my time is my business thank you very much, but with low hanging fruit like this, who can resist? BTW, this "Canadian forum" is "infested" with American content.

Edited February 4, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[August1991]

They are not criticism. They are important policy differences between McCain and Republicans.

Huh? It seems to me that there are several Talk Radio people against him and several Republican senators who didn't like the fact that McCain tried to cut out the pork that they added to bills. It's understandable that Alaska's Sen. Stevens doesn't like McCain.

"The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine," Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), also a senior member of the Appropriations panel, told the Boston Globe recently. "He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me."

A former colleague says McCain's abrasive nature would, at minimum, make his relations with Republicans on Capitol Hill uneasy if he were to become president. McCain could find himself the victim of Republicans who will not go the extra mile for him on legislative issues because of past grievances.

"John was very rough in the sandbox," said former senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), who is outspoken in his opposition to McCain's candidacy. "Everybody has a McCain story. If you work in the Senate for a while, you have a McCain story. . . . He hasn't built up a lot of goodwill."

Washington Post

By and large, I don't think the lack of this support will hurt McCain tomorrow or in November.

From your link above:

RAW STORY spoke last week with Kiley, as well as Ted Sampley, a North Carolina-based publisher who has been harshly criticizing McCain for more than 10 years. Sampley teamed up with Kiley in 2004 to found a similar group that targeted Senator John Kerry as he ran for president. They see McCain as an apologist for Vietnam's Communist government who sold out fellow POWs and servicemen missing in action from America's lengthy war in Southeast Asia.

These guys are going to go precisely nowhere with this.

On the Iraq war, McCain is right in fact and right politically. Whatever their feelings, most Americans do not want to walk away from Iraq. It's not in the nature of Americans to quit like that.

My comment about *Bushitler* referred to the idea that the radical American Left has demonized Bush. I don't know if they'll be able to demonize McCain the same way.

----

The ACU gave a rating of 82.3 to McCain:

Senator John McCain's lifetime rating of 82.3% from the American Conservative Union is often cited as proof that he is conservative. Here is a closer look at that 82.3 rating.

Link

(That link attempts to explain away McCain's high rating.)

BTW, the ACU gives a lifetime rating of 9 to Hillary Clinton:

Senator Hillary Clinton (D)

New York

2004 Score - 0

Previous Year's Score - 10

Lifetime Score - 9

Years of Service - 4

Link

It's crazy to suggest that McCain is a closet Democrat or he's to the left of Hillary Clinton.

Edited February 5, 2008 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

...My comment about *Bushitler* referred to the idea that the radical American Left has demonized Bush. I don't know if they'll be able to demonize McCain the same way.

Indeed, they will have to be careful about demonizing McCain. He is the un-Kerry when it comes to 'Nam, loyal through thick and thin.

President McCain has a nice "Tom Clancy novel" ring to it.

Edited February 5, 2008 by bush_cheney2004