McCain: Keeping GOP Alive

Between Thursday, January 24 and Tuesday, January 29, the day of the Florida Republican Primary, I'll be writing several columns on John McCain. Right now, he's the best -- and most electable -- of the GOP candidates. In my columns, I'd like to tackle some of the tough issues, including Senator McCain's stance on comprehensive immigration reform and on campaign finance reform. I believe he's generally right on both of them.

Sometimes what appears to be the "conservative" position isn't the sound one -- or the correct one. A classic case is the Civil Rights Act of 1964, strongly supported by Lyndon Johnson and just as strongly opposed by Barry Goldwater. In the election of 1964, Goldwater was swamped by Johnson, and a number of fine conservative legislators "drowned" along with the presidential nominee.

Yes, the Civil Rights Act interfered with the "freedoms" of some owners of hotels, restaurants, and the like. But the freedom to deny service to Black people and their families was not a "liberty" anyone should possess. Thus, Goldwater was wrong, and Johnson was right.

The controversy over the Act did great damage to the Republican Party, lasting damage. It meant the GOP lost the Black vote -- and apparently that loss is permanent. In presidential elections, the Republican candidate is lucky to get 6%-8% of the Black vote. That makes it nearly impossible to win several important states, including Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Illinois, and California. Also, there are 40-plus Black members of Congress (including one Senator, Obama), and none of them is a Republican.

That sad, enduring situation traces back more than 40 years to Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act.

As we examine John McCain's positions on various issues, we find him seeking -- often imperfectly -- to keep the Republican Party from repeating the mistakes of the Goldwater era. Frankly, he doesn't want his Party, however good its intentions, to become a Permanent Minority.

TWO VIEWS OF MIKE HUCKABEE: MATT & STEVE

Note: As the week goes on, I'll talk about a few of the many columns I've written on Gov. Sarah Heath Palin and why I think she would be a dynamic -- and successful -- candidate for the nation's highest offices. On my blogroll you'll find dozens of bloggers who support Sarah for the nation's highest offices. If you'd like to "sign-up" as a Sarah supporter, please contact Adam Brickley at his site (http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/)

Before that, however, I'll talk about correspondence I've received from Matt in Washington state (http://senseinpolitics.blogspot.com/) and John Hawkins in Florida (http://theforgottenstreet.com/)

In response to my recent column indicating that I believe the Mike Huckabee's effort to get the Republican nomination cannot not succeed, Matt in Washington state sent me the following e-mail:

Stephen, I saw your posting in which you say you withdraw Mike Huckabee from consideration. I understand your reasons why, and let me add some [about] why I support Huckabee. It is because he has articulated so eloquently things I have been thinking of for quite some time. Things I would expound on if I were running for political office. Positions I would collectively call " Practical Conservatism." He seems to be trying to lead the conservative movement away from vitriol and rhetoric to more practical solutions to problems. That is where you and I are.

As for his winning, well, he could just be another Goldwater. He'll blaze the trail for another person who will come along and say the same things to a more receptive audience. I think that some of his ideas are light years ahead of what is currently being preached as policy, particularly in the realm of health care. Because he thinks outside the box, and because he holds to his principles while still being likable, he is the one I am truly fired up about. Some had the same feeling for Bobby Kennedy.

But I am realistic, I will be satisfied if Giuliani or McCain get in (hopefully with Gov. Palin). Giuliani being president won't mean that we'll have more abortions in this country, and I doubt that the current status would change even if Huckabee got in. Giuliani comes across as urbane and sophisticated; heck, he's from New York! Sure he's had issues in his personal life that make me have a few questions. But we've had a divorced man as Commander in Chief -- Reagan, who also was Republican -- so that should be put to rest. Giuliani has crossover appeal, and could actually put my state (Washington) in play.

I want to run for office someday, and I think that a variation of Huckabee's platform would appeal to the large number of Independents we have here. I'd have to be looked at as a moderate if I wanted any chance of winning statewide office as a Republican.

This e-mail has run longer than I originally wanted, but I wanted to say check out my newest posting today on "Gun Control for Criminals" and let me know what you think.

Thanks for listening . . .

Matt (E-mail at: corpsole2@olypen.com)


Steve's Response: Matt, your supportive comments about Mike Huckabee are pretty much in line with my own views of the man. I just don't believe he or Fred can win a year from November. (Admittedly, in the early part of 1992, I didn't believe Bill Clinton had a chance against Bush, Sr., who was coming off a period of great popularity after the Gulf War.)

What has changed since then is the huge amount of money needed to advertise on TV in the Super Tuesday states (including California and New York, as well as several other large states). Super Tuesday comes shortly after the Florida primary, which will also require a lot of money. I expect Giuliani and Romney to have significant amounts of campaign cash, and Thompson MAY have enough to keep afloat. McCain is always a question mark, but he seems to be doing better.

Can Mike Huckabee possibly have a dramatic surge among primary voters? In that regard, one candidate in modern times has had an amazing take-off, and that was John Kerry, who was at 9% in late November, 2003 and was at 52% in February, 2004. (Howard Dean screamed himself out of the running, and John Edwards was always more popular with the media than with voters, so it was relatively easy for Kerry to move up quickly.)

In the race for 2008, the only real movement in the polls over the last several months has been by Hillary Clinton with her putting distance between herself and Obama. Giuliani has been at 30% since the last Ice Age.

By the way, one national poll showed Romney with higher unfavorables than Hillary Clinton. She has high favorables (high 40s) and high unfavorables (mid-40s). The highest favorables of any candidate are those for Giuliani. People who say they aren't going to vote for Rudy in the primary still have a favorable view of him.

I've read that nearly six-out-of-ten Americans haven't seen so much as ONE debate. The current campaign started very early, but it's still mainly of interest to political junkies like us.

Evangelical-type candidates in the Northeast and West (Dreier in Cal., Irey in PA) tend to be gravitating toward Rudy. Hard-right evangelicals like Dobson are attacking Thompson, mostly for his virtues rather than his faults. He's not for an amendment banning gay "marriage," mainly because such an amendment doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of passing.

Also, he's against a total ban on abortion because (1) it wouldn't pass either the Senate or the House; (2) it would criminalize women and doctors involved in early-term abortions. There's massive national support for allowing such abortions -- 84% believe it should be allowable.

Overall, Mike Huckabee should have a bright political future. With Fred Thompson, I believe his political career is behind him.

If I had to go way out on a limb, I'd guess the Democratic ticket will be: Clinton-Richardson. The Republican ticket may well be Giuliani-Palin.

Steve (e-mail at: TalkTop65@aol.com)