Governor Romney threw his support behind Senator McCain today, in another gracious and honorable act that I think reflects favorably on his character. The NY Times article on this is quite good.
During this campaign (as well as previous ones), I believe we have seen John McCain's weaknesses quite clearly...and I won't pretend that I'll forget them. But I also recognize three things. One is that he does have significant strengths. Two is that nobody is perfect and we need to be able to be forgiving at times even in politics. And three is that, as I reviewed in the post below, there are at least two issues that I consider of the utmost significance to our nation, which the election in November will impact on greatly: the War on Terror, and the Supreme Court. And on these two points, the difference between John McCain and the Democrats is vast.
If it were not for this last point, I would consider other options, since McCain has certainly shown himself to be non-conservative, even liberal, in some key areas. But this is not the time for that. Those issues are too important.
On a different note, I also believe that this is another part of Mitt Romney's process of building the support he will need to make another run--a successful run--for the White House in 2012. Political parties are not perfect, but they are powerful. It is the way we in America join together in a cause with others, even though we do not all agree on all points. It allows us to help important changes to occur, and to be able to unite behind our national leaders. Romney recognized, more than any other Republican candidate, how important this principle was and is. It is a principle that Reagan understood well. The "Reagan Coalition" of fiscal/economic, social, and national defense conservatives is based on this principle.
Romney's dedication to this important coalition building helps McCain and the Republicans now, and in turn should help him when he runs again for the presidency.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Romney's Endorsement of McCain Today
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I hate to seem disagreeable, but I am not convinced that the difference between McCain and the Democrats on Supreme Court Justices is really that far. When one considers that McCain's legacy is the abomination we call campaignn finance reform, it is difficult to believe that he would really appoint originalist judges. I believe he knows that an originalist judge would rule against his legacy, and considering his temperment, I don't know that I can trust him to stick to his word on this one.
He might not appoint Justices like Ginsburg and Breyer, but I have to think he would appoint Justices like Kennedy and Souter, and that does no good for those of us who believe the Constitution means what it says.
He may have come to accept that there are problems with McCain-Feingold, but I have yet to hear him accept that the biggest problem is that it is a violation of the constitution. Rather, he seems to think the only failing is that it gives liberals like George Soros too much power (read: it gives them the right to too much political free speech).
I am still not convinced that I can vote for McCain. He's got some time to convince me, but I don't think he's ever going to be willing to say he'd appoint originalist Justices even if it means that they would overturn McCain-Feingold.
Oh, I totally agree that I don't have a lot of trust in him at this point.
Then again, I see limited options. What I'm going off is that he has specifically committed to conservatives that he would nominate "judges like Justice Roberts and Justice Alito." Now, he may not keep his word on that, but at least we have some hope, whereas we know for sure what we get with the Dems, and it ain't
good.
On McCain-Feingold he's at least admitted problems with it, though I still don't like him on this issue.
Then there's the GWOT issue. As Romney said, Republicans debate how best to win, where Dems debate how fast we can get out, pretty much regardless of consequences. It's frightening, ya know?
Could this help lead the way to a McCain/Romney ticket?
It's possible, but I still think unlikely. I'm not sure it's more than a gut instinct, though. Surely McCain's estimation of Romney must be higher so that may be a factor. And Romney might be able to help in some important states like Michigan and the northeast.
However, VP is an odd job. Most VPs don't do a lot, and Romney is a practical, effective administrator. Seems to me he might be more effective in the cabinet. But then it's hard to find many cabinet members who have gone to the presidency. Romney probably needs some position that is visible enough, can utilize his talents well, and would not complicate a run for the presidency again as early as 2012.
The major impact I see is that if Romney does run in 2012, he will likely do so with the support and blessing of John McCain and the "party powers" who have largely pushed McCain to the top this time.
I can't imagine how there could ever be a McCain/Romney ticket. First of all, McCain stands a really good chance of being trounced in this election, and why would Romney want to tie himself to a losing cause. For him, it would be much better to work hard this year to get Republican Congressional candidates elected (like Reagan did), and then when McCain loses, he is positioned as the guy who did everything he could to keep Republicans in power while McCain was losing the farm.
Second, I don't think that McCain would ever choose Romney. McCain has a real "I'm taking my ball and going home" attitude. I saw it when I worked on the Hill. When someone crosses him, even when it is a legitimate question about his political choices in the past, he moves quickly into Hate Mode, and is willing to take fairly extraordinary measures to destroy that person. That is the real reason why he voted against the Bush Tax cuts, because he was still upset at Bush over the 2000 election. He took offense at Romney legitimately questioning his record, and I think that puts Romney into the hated camp. There is no way he chooses someone he hates, even if it were (questionable) the politically best option.
Post a Comment