A Shift in Political Landscape Seems To Favor McCain in '08

The New York Sun ^ | 11/28/05

[areafiftyone]

Senator McCain of Arizona is emerging as an early favorite for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 as a result of a shift in the issues dominating the American political landscape, according to political analysts.

Intensifying public concern about the war in Iraq, the prospect of protracted corruption trials in Washington, and renewed qualms among Republicans about federal spending are all putting wind into Mr. McCain's sails while setting back most of the senator's rivals for the nomination.

"If Iraq and foreign policy and national security and deficit spending are important issues, that will benefit people like McCain," the publisher of a leading political newsletter, Stuart Rothenberg, said.

A Republican political consultant with national campaign experience said looming decisions about when and how to withdraw American troops from Iraq should boost the prospects of Mr. McCain, a former Navy pilot who spent more than five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. The senator has vocally opposed calls for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, but he has also clashed with the White House over a measure he sponsored to prohibit Americans from engaging in torture.

A former aide to the senator, Marshall Wittmann, also said he believes the stars are aligning for a McCain candidacy.

"My sense is there's a significant amount of momentum shifting to Mc-Cain within the Republican Party over the past few months," said Mr. Wittmann, who served as the senator's communications director for two years before quitting last year to join the centrist Democratic Leadership Council.

[areafiftyone]

McCain may be the media darling but he is also the American poll darling. He wins hands down WITH Giuliani as the front runner. Things may change by 2007 but right now this is the way it stands.

[ConservativeDude]

If McCain is the GOP nominee, the NRA should field its own third party candidate.

[Bahbah]

all I can do is pray that he gets beat really bad after NH (all over again).

I'll be right there with you.

[kabar]

At least McCain refused to join the 79 senators who voted to have the WH provide status reports on the war. I am an Allen supporter, but I was deeply disappointed that he joined the majority rather the courageous minority.

[j_k_l]

Perot is not the reason why Bubba was elected. It was "read my lying lips" and his SCOTUS picks that cost him the election.

The Republicans took their conservative base for granted and it cost them dearly. If they have not learned from history, they will repeat this mistake and bring about similar results and there will be another Clinton being sworn in.

[rhombus]

Perot is not the reason why Bubba was elected. It was "read my lying lips" and his SCOTUS picks that cost him the election. The Republicans took their conservative base for granted and it cost them dearly. If they have not learned from history, they will repeat this mistake and bring about similar results and there will be another Clinton being sworn in.

Uh huh, sure.

[Verginius Rufus]

McCain won the NH primary in 2000 with the votes of non-Republicans who were allowed to vote in the Republican primary. If Bill Bradley had been a more plausible alternative to Gore, they might have voted in the Democrat primary instead and then Bush would have won the Republican primary.

I don't think McCain won any states in 2000 where the primary was restricted to the actual members of the party in question. He would have the same problem in 2008, only more so--he might win some primaries with the help of Democrats and Independents, but would have no chance in the closed-primary states.

[rhombus]

McCain won the NH primary in 2000 with the votes of non-Republicans who were allowed to vote in the Republican primary.

Agreed. When will the party end this "open primary" nonsense?

[blutto]

Well if it is McCain vs most Dems I have no choice but to hold my nose and vote for McCain - Period. Absolutely. At all costs the current variant of the Democratic Party cannot be allowed to dismantle the effort to destroy or at lease fatally damage the Islamofacist threat. McCain is vastly more able and willing to pursue the fight than ANYONE in the Democratic Party. Some people seem to be willing to have Hillary in office just to prove an ideological point. Does anyone really trust Hillary to do the 'right' thing if it becomes inconvenient ? Concentrate folks. The Republicans MUST win in 2008. It is important that the defeatist isolationists in the Democratic Party be kept in the wilderness. If McCain can do that and some unknown 'favorite' can't, then McCain it must be. Period.

[beanball]

Fred is an ok guy.

[j_k_l]

"Uh huh, sure."

If the Repubs run a liberal, those red states will become blue and the beer is on you.

[AmericanChef]

-"My sense is there's a significant amount of momentum shifting to Mc-Cain within the Republican Party over the past few months," said Mr. Wittmann, who served as the senator's communications director for two years before quitting last year to join the centrist Democratic Leadership Council.-

No bias there!

[RebelBanker]

Thank you both. I appreciate 'short, sweet and to the point.' Dan, I am not sure about the Ultimate Fighting issue, but all of the rest would seem to be career killers for anyone looking for conservative support.

[DM1]

"Some people seem to be willing to have Hillary in office just to prove an ideological point. "
and that my friend is quite scary
I agree with your assesment completely

[rod1]

Change in landscape favoring McCain!--as in the dark side of the moon? a deep crater on mars? Laughable promotion of the MSM darling is all this is.

[PeteB570]

He ain't going to get my vote in the primary.

But then again, NC is so far down the primary list that it doesn't matter much.

[kabar]

In 1992, Bubba received 43%, Bush 37.5%, and Perot 19%. Clinton won decisively in the electoral vote, 370-178. Bush had a poorly managed campaign (Mary Maitlan) and failed to refute Clinton's dire portrayal of the economy. In fact, we had emerged from the recession.

Perot had a major impact on the election, including setting the agenda and making Bush the odd man out in the debates. Both Clinton and Perot were running against Bush, Bush lost states like Montana, Nevada, Maine, and NH by less than 10,000 votes and Perot took over 20% in all these states.

Bush lost narrowly in some larger states, e.g., Georgia (13,000 votes with Perot winning over 300,000 votes), Pennsylvania ( 48,000 votes with Perot winning over 900,000 votes), and Ohio (90,000 votes with Perot winning over 1,000,000 votes.) If Perot had not run, Clinton would probably have lost. Although Perot many have attracted many new voters, one could make a reasonable case that more Perot voters were Reps than Dems.

[WKUHilltopper]

I think I'd vote for just about anyone other than the "Whore of Babylon". '08 sure is gonna suck...

[fieldmarshaldj]

If I want to vote for someone who helps Democrats, I vote 'Rat. Either we nominate a Republican, or millions of Conservatives will look elsewhere for a candidate (or none at all).