Tuesday, February 05, 2008

The Die Has Been Cast   [Victor Davis Hanson]

Like many I prefer McCain but will gladly support Romney if he wins the nomination. His campaign ad here in California against Hillary's inexperience was excellent, and so was McCain's on his new views on illegal immigration.

But so far today I have gotten the usual daily spam e-mail from various fringe and self-acclaimed conservative groups and personages — variously alleging that McCain was not a real war hero, questioning his conduct during capture, commenting on his marital situation, and suggesting he was unhinged and identical to Ted Kennedy, Hillary (fill in the blanks). I think for most the level of vituperation is astounding and completely unforeseen.

I have no idea of whether the moderates that McCain would pick up will be outweighed by the conservatives who sit our or vote for the Democratic candidate. Nor do I have any notion of how many McCain supporters — and this is never discussed- will be so turned off by the present assault on their candidate that they would likewise sit out if Romney won. (I've talked to a lot of blue-collar Democrats [not in a think tank, but here in rural southern Fresno County] that say they would vote McCain, but so far not one who said they would cross over for Romney; and likewise a lot of Republicans who claim they will never vote for McCain.)

Instead I make only a couple of observations:

1.  The McCain animus apparently transcends ideology. He has admitted his mistakes on immigration, and would not raise taxes, while his ACU ratings are good, and his ADA/ACLU scores are lousy — nearly the exact opposite of those of Obama and Clinton. Again, the anger apparently derives from his gratuitous past snubbing of prominent conservatives (especially the notion that a rude McCain didn't need them then, but a conciliatory one does now) and can't be assuaged. At this point, I take the base's claims they will sit out — or that Hillary or Obama is no worse than McCain-as genuine.

And given their furor expressed so far on the record, it would be almost impossible for them to recant, and they shouldn't be defamed or coerced to try. No doubt they will lead the charge in a year or two against the liberal Supreme Court nominations of a President Obama or Clinton, or payroll and income tax increases, or a timetable withdrawal from Iraq. Just as McCain is trying to win them back now, they will try to win back then those who are turned off by the venom expressed against the likely Republican candidate. In either case, it will be nearly impossible to do so.

2. Among the anti-McCain camp there has been a willingness to contextualize the prior Reagan pragmatism and apostasies on amnesty, taxes, nuclear disarmament, foreign policy, the creation of larger government, and judicial appointments. And the same generous consideration of context is used to explain Romney's rather amazing liberal stances on the Reagan legacy, gays, abortion, etc. in his 1990s political career in Massachusetts.

It is clear that pragmatism or expediency is not seen as a sin greater than erroneous conviction, in the sense that it is to be understandable that Romney had to do or say some liberal things in blue-Boston to get elected, but that McCain did them willingly when he did not have to in red Arizona. Or maybe it is the magnitude of the sin (McCain-Feingold is felt worse than once being pro-choice and distancing oneself from Reagan)? Or perhaps the chronology of the sin (the 1990s were then, 2007 is now)?

Either way it doesn't really matter anymore, the McCain animus is deeply ingrained and apparently can't be retracted. It only makes things worse either to attack sincere anti-McCainites or to ask them to reconsider, or to ask them to vote for the lesser of what they see as the two evils.

As they say, the die has been cast, and everyone will have to live with the results.

02/05 05:07 PMShare