The Forgotten McCain Angle
I don’t have time at the moment to present my manifesto on this election and its place in the culture wars, but for now I just want to ask: why have the tributes to McCain failed to mention one of the most interesting and commendable aspects of his career, that being his involvement in normalizing relations with Vietnam? It’s the rhetorical and moral capstone to the whole POW narrative, and ought to be cited more frequently by his supporters as an indication of his strength of character.
My off-the-cuff guess is because it would, at first glance, be too incongruous with the McCain campaign’s attempt to demonize Obama for being soft on our enemies, willing to talk to anyone at the drop of a hat. I know that it’s not actually particularly related, but the McCain campaign has shown no interest in putting in the legwork to set up any complicated logical arguments behind their policies in other, more popular areas, instead going for the cheap shot and the easy one-liner. Why start on an issue that the right-wing base won’t be particularly excited by, even if you can sell it?
— David Samuels · Sep 4, 03:48 PM · #
My guess would be that McCain campaign rightly guesses that most Americans pay little attention to accomplishments, but instead vote primarily on the basis of a pattern of political alignment, or perceptions of personality and appearance. To some degree, its more of a popularity contest than an issues contest. Why muddy the message and cause potential confusion unnecessarily?
— CHART · Sep 4, 04:02 PM · #
My guess is that he took a lot of heat from veterans when he did that and as the presidential candidate with soldiering in his background the vets are solid bloc to go McCain. With the Reps firmly following a mobilize the base strategy they can’t risk agitating this group too much.
— Jim · Sep 4, 04:04 PM · #
Conventioneers still think that Vietnam is the enemy.
— talboito · Sep 4, 04:08 PM · #
Also neglected is McCains proven ability to work with Dems to promote the common good, such as coauthoring a bill with Ted Kennedy in the last few years. He’s not wobbly—he’s able to get things done.
— Bruce Meyer · Sep 4, 04:10 PM · #
Because it links him tightly with John Kerry, currently Republican party anathema. Next?
— Sanjay · Sep 4, 04:16 PM · #
I can’t speak for normalization, but to Bruce’s charge that we have heard little about McCain working with Democrats, I call shenanigans. The talking point is usually something like, “As a senator, John McCain has consistently reached across the aisle, working with Democratic senators like Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold to draft important legislation. Barack Obama claims to want to move beyond partisan politics, and yet the National Journal recently ranked him as the most liberal member of the Senate.
“Who really represents change? I’m John McCain, and I approve of this message.”
(I got carried away there.)
— Blar · Sep 4, 05:33 PM · #
“Because it links him tightly with John Kerry, currently Republican party anathema. Next?”
Sure, but it also lets him seem reasonable while taking shots at Obama’s plans to have Kim Jong Il sleep in the Lincoln bedroom without preconditions. I’m pretty sure that’s what he proposed, right?
Anyway, back to Miss Alaska.
— Matt Frost · Sep 4, 06:23 PM · #
That’s assuming Kim Jon Il is still alive! I bet he puts the double at the Hyatt.
I don’t know how much traction a proven record of diplomacy with an ex-communist foe will have with the Sarah Palin target audience. Perhaps he will flog that experience when he remembers that once upon a time, in those maverick days, he supported immigration reform and opposed Bush’s tax cuts. I am John McCain but the Republican Party does not support this message.
Does anyone else find the “get past partisan politics” thing a little creepy? Sounds kind of like 1984 to me: “Soon, there will be one word to express everything!”
— walker · Sep 5, 12:24 AM · #