When McCain Was the Loser
By adamsweb Posted in Elections — Comments (27) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Imagine if Mike Huckabee waits two months after John McCain clinches the nomination to endorse him, and waits to release his delegates to McCain until the day before the convention. In addition, he runs around the convention promoting himself and his message rather than focusing on supporting McCain’s. It would be the type of display that would lead many of the GOP’s pundits to declare it would be the end of Huckabee’s career and that it would forever alienate the party from supporting a 2012 or 2016 run.
Yet, if Huckabee did this, he’d be following the lead of John McCain.
McCain as Runner-Up
John McCain was a popular item for a good month or so in 2000. The highlight of his campaign was a 49-31% drubbing of Governor George W. Bush in the New Hampshire primary, but McCain’s momentum was short-lived. He lost South Carolina, and then won Michigan only thanks to a sabotage effort by a Democratic state representative to embarrass Bush endorser Governor John Engler (R-MI). He also picked up his home state of Arizona. From there, the wheels fell off for John McCain on Super Tuesday, which was March 7th that year. McCain was the favorite of liberal New England Republicans and scooped up Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Connecticut, losing only Maine to Bush. Bush, however, swept primaries from coast to coast, winning by decisive margins in California, New York, Ohio, Missouri, Maryland, and Georgia, along with Maine. He carried every state with a majority of the vote.
Up ahead was Southern Tuesday, where a slate of Southern winner-take-all states loomed large and would clinch Bush’s nomination by a pure number of pledged. McCain suspended his campaign (but didn’t drop out) and Bush rolled through Southern States. He won 70+% of the vote in all 6 states voting on March 14th, and 80+% in Louisiana and Texas. It was clear Bush had united most of the GOP, but there was no McCain endorsement.
March 21st: Bush won 67% of the Vote in Illinois. There was no McCain endorsement.
April 4th: Bush won 73% of the vote in Pennsylvania, and 69% of the Vote in Wisconsin. There was no McCain endorsement.
May 2nd: Bush won 81% in Indiana, 79% in North Carolina, and 73% in DC. There was no McCain endorsement.
May 9th: McCain finally endorsed Bush ahead of two more near 80% win by Bush in the GOP primaries. The headlines from the London Guardian described McCain’s endorsement as “reluctant” and McCain reiterated he’d fight for his own agenda. During the intervening two months, word spread of a possible third party bid by McCain and media organizations even did polls on a possible Bush v. Gore v. McCain match up.
Of course, this was not the end of McCain. McCain didn’t release his delegates to vote for Bush until the afternoon before the convention, after he’d secured a prime time speaking spot, and another media story for releasing his delegates.
USA Today’s headline in discussing McCain’s election behavior said, “McCain Releases Delegates, Not Spotlight” and detailed how McCain’s schedule seemed more like that of the nominee than the runner up: “McCain's tentative schedule includes one news conference, three speeches, dozens of media interviews and a bus trip. With an eye on a second presidential race, the Arizona senator will promote himself and his reform agenda at the July 31-Aug. 3 convention in Philadelphia.”
Indeed, a man who had been so thoroughly drubbed in the GOP primaries was acting like the winner and taking every piece of media attention he could get, doing his best to distract from the party’s nominee and the Bush agenda.
The Frontrunner
Fast forward eight years and McCain is the frontrunner. However, unlike Bush, he has not been burning up with popular support. Despite media and party boss declaration that it was over, McCain lost Louisiana and Kansas (the latter by more than 20% of the vote.) In Virginia, he was held to 50% of the vote and Mike Huckabee managed to take two Congressional Districts in Wisconsin. On Super Tuesday, he won only three states by a Majority Vote (Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York) and won Missouri by a whopping margin: 33% of the vote to Huckabee’s 32%. Perhaps, most embarrassingly, McCain failed to win a majority of the vote from those who knew him best: 53% of Arizonans cast votes for other candidates, even while Mitt Romney won 51% of Bay State voters, and Mike Huckabee won 61% in Arkansas.
Unlike Bush, who was one week away from winning the required number of pledged delegates to secure the nomination in his own right after Super Tuesday in 2000, McCain came out of Super Tuesday this year with it apparent it would take at least a month to clinch the race. Almost immediately a hue in cry went up from the McCain campaign for Mike Huckabee to withdraw from the campaign.
When McCain was the second place finisher, he could take his time at endorsing Bush, even as Democrats were united around their eventual nominee, Al Gore. With McCain as the frontrunner, it’s expected the entire party will immediately rally around McCain even as Democrats seemed to be in for a long slog to the convention in Denver, and McCain has vast amounts of the Republican base that are thoroughly displeased with him. Based on the comparison, the best you can say of John McCain is that he’s consistent in his drive to fight for himself.
The Moral of the Story
I know remembering history isn’t popular. Even on conservative blogs, there are those who decry Republican “impeaching Clinton over sex” for crying out loud. However, the lesson of 2000 is there. First of all, the cry of McCain’s staff for Huckabee to get out of the race is both hypocritical and presumptuous. Hypocritical because McCain didn’t drop out until one week before Bush had gotten the number of pledged delegates required to clinch the nomination and didn’t endorse him for nearly two months after that and presumptuous because McCain hasn’t clinched 1191 committed delegates to the National Convention.
Secondly, many factors led to the 2000 campaign being the tightest Presidential election since 1876 and none of them involved John McCain failing to endorse Bush until May. Those who are annoyed, upset, angry, and throwing a fit about Huckabee’s continued presence in the race need to chill out.
Finally, those who prognosticate that Huckabee not endorsing McCain in February, 2008 will mortally wound a future effort in 2012 are ignorant of history. If they think anyone other than political history buffs will remember the current flap in four years, they have another think coming.
If McCain clinches on March 4th, Huckabee will endorse him a lot quicker than two months after the fact and can be expected to be far more cooperative in the fall campaign than was McCain.
If McCain loses in 2008, when the GOP begins its primary process in 2012, the first question we’ll ask will not be, “Who got on board with the losing campaign first?” Rather we’ll be concerned with how we avoid another defeat like it. How Huckabee conducts himself over the next three years will be more determinant of his future chances than the late winter rumblings of party apparatchiks and pundits.
Cross-posted from Adam's Blog
That's why they've been sending whispers to Bob Novak about how they need Huckabee to get out and putting out press releases showing how impossible it is for him to even win.
The Governor of Texas trying to get Huckabee out doesn't count.
but who cares?
Regardless of whether McCain is or isn't hypocritical and regardless of whether an American war hero and and one of the most popular political figures in the country was able to overcome any negative reaction from his actions in 2000 (which many may also felt were justified considering some of the attacks on him in South Carolina) what does that have to do with Huckabee?
In 4 years, Huckabee will remain a big-spending former governor who would be a good standup comedian and whose appeal as President is limited to about 15 to 20% of the population. His circumstances are nothing like McCain's.
I think it's telling that the negativity toward Huckabee's stringing this out has waned significantly. He's becoming an afterthought. Very few care what he does at this point.
A recent Rasmussen Poll showed a 50% unfavorable rating for McCain.
Huckabee has potential to reach beyond that base.
The guy got more than that in the states he won, more in South Carolina, more in Missouri. He focused on his base beca8use he didn't have the money to reach beyond that.
That's his ceiling. He has about half the support of Republicans that McCain has, and a little more than a quarter of the delegates.
Granted, he has a higher percentage of socon support, but that's offset by his poor numbers among fiscons and milcons.
Really, it's time to let go. But I don't think you will, even after the convention.
NT
The pretense is that America's Pastor appeals to any group outside of evangelical social conservatives.
The plain truth is he doesn't, well except maybe Democrats trying to set up someone that can be beat like a drum.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
1) McCain (rightly or wrongly) felt the Bush campaign or surrogates personally attacked him through mailers and the "black baby" campaign. He does take that kind of thing personally. McCain has done nothing like that to Huckabee. The closest was Romney's campaign, but they didn't go that far.
2) McCain had a decent widespread support of 30+% in the country. Huckabee doesn't have more than 10-15% nationwide. He is now breaking that ceiling because he is a) getting the anti-McCain vote and b) no one is turning out.
3) McCain had the chance in 2008 to run against an unexciting crowd. Hopefully in 2012 or 2016, Jindal, Palin, Thune, Jeb, Sanford, Pawlenty, Kyl, and/or DeMint will mount a race. Our bench ain't too bad and it will mean that Huck has to find a way to win non-evangelicals with a message besides "I'm not McCain."
His best way to do that is the run for AR SEN. He can work on non-religious issues and get a solid record. Then his personable style and great communication abilities won't be hampered by his disdain for conservatives ("Club for Greed"), which would help him a lot.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
McCain's widspread support in this post and it was much less than 30% in most of these States, Alan Keyes was taking 3-8% of the vote in most of these places.
The 2012 Scenario, you listed is a tad unrealistic. Jindal will still not be quite ready. I don't think Palin wants, Pawlenty amounts to a younger Tommy Thompson. Jim DeMint and Jon Kyl are both Senators and after McCain, we wouldn't make that mistake.
The big lesson out of 2008 is that nothing really matters other than whose turn it is. That and nothing else (other than Independent voters) explains the McCain nomination. People didn't care about merit, just whose turn it is. It'll be Romney v. Huckabee,like it or not.
3) Isn't it amusing that people who allege Huck is an insufferable liberal want him in the Senate?
"The big lesson out of 2008 is that nothing really matters other than whose turn it is."
The big lesson I saw was that being authentic and conservative on the major issues of the day matters. Huck is the former, not the latter. Romney was the latter, but not the former. McCain was closest to being both (as was Bush in 2000).
I think Huck would be a better Senator than Pryor and he could win, so I want him to run.
I think he would be a worse President than Romney, McCain, Rudy, or Fred so he was my 5th choice in a virtual tie with Paul.
If Huck sits around for 4-8 years and runs again, I expect he gets the Edwards treatment. I don't see how, out of office, he can garner more support over that time period. So he wins SoCons and IA again. And loses other states.
And your cursory dismissal of our rising stars is humorous. Sure, most won't run. But if any one of them runs, they beat Huck.
If Huck isn't going to run for the Senate, his best hope is that no one good runs next time and he's the only major candidate.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Two things: authenticity and conservative positions on the major issues of the day. McCain and Huck had authenticity. Romney and McCain had conservative positions on the major issues of the day (War, economy, terrorism).
I never said anything about "authentic conservative." But if you're doing your best to talk past me, you are succeeding.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Mike "Gamecock" DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
Huckabee should study 2000. Is there any doubt in ANYONE'S mind that had McCain NOT acted as he did in 2000, as described above, and then NOT actively undermined President Bush for the past eight years, he would now be celebrated by conservatives and would be popular throughout the Republican Party?
Really, it was the intervening 8 years of sticking your finger in the eye of conservatives. I don't know anyone who raised the issue of how he conducted himself after he lost. Huckabee will get out when McCain to 1191, which will put him about a foot above McCain in terms of class.
He called the conservative Club for Growth, the "Club for Greed." He insulted businessmen and people who care about increasing economic growth to help raise incomes and take people out of poverty. He won the NEA's endorsement in NH, thus coddling with union's that do more to harm education in the country than anyone else.
I still don't see any analysis of how Huck wins over non-evangelicals when he's not the "protest McCain" candidate. McCain won over enough social conservatives b/c he's pro-life, pro-family, pro-adoption, and supports traditional marriage.
How do you see Huck winning over pro-growth voters? Businessmen? Social moderates?
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Can change in 8 years. Huck hasn't run a perfect Campaign, but he has more class than McCain (though that's not all that hard.)
Yeah, calling conservative "greedy" is classy. We'll see how well that works in 4-8 years. When he raises as much money as Ron Paul, let me know.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
I hope Huck fights all the way to the convention and completely discredits himself in the party, destroying any hope he has of being on a Presidential ticket ever.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
I keep hearing Huck radio spots, and all they are selling is his best-selling book, From Hope to Eternity. I think he is simply using his campaign, and the donations coming from same, to hawk his book, and increase sales.
If he drops out of the Presidential race he has to pay for those spots out of his own pocket.
I doubt the ads end with, "I'm Mike Huckabee and I approve this message." And Legally he can't. Huckabee has no book called, "From Hope to Eternity" If he is running an ad for a book, it's being paid for his publisher. Perhaps, "From Hope to Higher Ground"
1191 for McCain - I don't think he stays in untill the convention. He's just stuborn and wants to play untill the game is really over, right now there's 10 minutes to play with McCain having the ball and a first down and a score 12 - 48, but the clock still hasn't run out. The clock will have run out when McCain hits 1191, and I don't blame Huck for staying in that long. I think both Huck and McCain are quite stubborn people, and I bet McCain would have done the same if the situation was reversed - there the type that don't give up untill its officially over. As long Huck is runnig a positive campaign he's not really hurting anybody.
What I've heard from McCain's camp is Huckabee should stay in as long as he thinks he should. Now, I have heard from external McCain backers that Huckabee should get out, but that's not the same thing.
I don't think McCain's staff gives a whit what Huckabee does, because he's already in position to win regardless.
If Huckabee spends some time going forward showing fiscal restraint, dumps the class warfare rhetoric, and gains some credible foreign policy experience even I'd take a serious look at him.
If, however, he's the same Huckabee we saw this time, even if he did somehow win the nomination, his loss to the democrat would be of biblical proportions.
FDT's Principles