What’s Behind The McCain Pro-Choice Feelers?
A lot of talk is flying on the Republican side of the 2008 election about McCain’s tentative information gathering on the feelings of Republican bigwigs and donors towards a pro-choice VP. Multiple theories abound, but they can basically be gathered under two tents: he’s rehearsing for actually picking a pro-choice candidate, or he’s covering his butt with moderates by pretending he wanted to go with a pro-choice VP, but the doggone base just wouldn’t let him!
A reader of Marc Ambinder puts it well:
I keep seeing or hearing media reports that McCain is considering tapping a pro-choice vice president, and I’ve seen you post to this effect a number of times. But I can’t help but wonder whether this isn’t orchestrated for another purpose. There are two possible reasons why the McCain campaign is floating this idea: one, he’s seriously considering the idea, or two, he wants us to think he’s seriously considering the idea.
I don’t believe for a second that it’s the former because I think there are some pretty strong political reasons to think it might be the latter, and I just can’t see McCain, who has real troubles with his base, angering them leading into the convention. Why would you rile up the nasties right before you’re in a room with all of them? You wouldn’t. But, what if you were about to choose a pro-life zealot like Eric Cantor, or even a standard-bearer like Romney, and were worried about how it would appear to the middle? Wouldn’t you want a little press leading up to the announcement that suggested you were thinking in the middle? McCain faces real opposition from folks at NARAL and other pro-choice organizations, but he is lucky that most of the public thinks he is FAR more moderate than his voting record or even his own statements suggest. Call it “maverick warm-glow.” He has done a marvelous job of keeping these fires burning. Likewise, by floating these rumors of a pro-choice candidate, when he comes around and chooses someone in the Republican fold, it’s as if he crumpled to their demands, and the base feel like he listens to them. This is not crazy talk!
Although the tone is obviously one of an anti-McCain partisan, I nevertheless pretty much agree with the analysis. McCain is not stupid, and he knows what the reaction of the base will be to anyone pro-choice – and it’s similar to the reaction of a ‘progressive’ to capitalism. If he really wanted to go pro-choice, he’d just do it. And given the fact that Giuliani and Lieberman have been already announced as convention speakers, I think we can probably rule them out as VP picks (Giuliani would never say yes to that role, anyway).
I still don’t know who it will be (please, please, please – not Romney!), but I’ll wager a princely sum that the pick will be solidly pro-life…
I think you and Ambinder are correct, the pro-choice talk by the McCain camp is positioning and posturing. He’s always been solidly pro-life, perhaps not as out front and vocal as some (which explains the reason he is viewed by many as moderate on the issue?), but is as reliable a pro-life vote as there is in the Congress.
I don’t think you have to worry about it being Romney, that would be like Bush choosing McCain in 2000; ain’t gonna happen. I do agree he needs the most help with the conservative base and so look for him to pick a solidly conservative, as opposed to moderate/independent, VP.
Armbinder would make sense were it not for his extremely strong pro-life statements at Saddleback.
I think it might be very simple. He would like to pick Joe Lieberman. Friend, supporter, and quasi-Democrat. Good man, bad choice for VP, but probably my first choice of SecState.
The “maverick warm-glow” has always thrown me for a loop too. I remember about a year ago, my mom said to me, “I really like McCain, but did you know he’s pro-life now?” When I pointed out that he always has been, she just wouldn’t believe me. As an avowed Obama partisan, I find it absolutely maddening that every false thing people believe about McCain (pro-choice, moderate, knowledgeable about foreign policy) redounds to his benefit and every false thing people believe about Obama (Muslim, elitist, ultra-liberal) also redounds to the benefit of McCain.
Ryan, the simple reality is that most people aren’t paying much attention. You and the other folks here are outside the norm in terms of following and understanding the depth and breadth of the candidates. On McCain vs Obama, I think the disparity you describe – which I’m not sure I wholeheartedly agree with – owes to the fact that McCain has been around for 20 something years and so people have fully formed opinions. Both his supporters and detractors are entrenched. Obama is a relative newcomer and so is scrutinized more closely, including that anything said about him sticks until proven false – think: guilty until proven innocent.
Right, but McCain has the benefit of having been around for 20 years and created an image of himself that isn’t even accurate to begin with. Leaving aside anything you might disagree with (like maverick or moderate status), it’s still the case that an awful lot of people are in my mom’s boat: they think he’s pro-choice. And he’s pretty manifestly not pro-choice, nor has he ever been. I am also not pro-choice, so I’m actually okay with that position. But it’s the falseness of his image that is completely mind-boggling. And it’s mind-boggling precisely because he’s been around long enough that people ought to know basic things like what he thinks about abortion.
Agreed. There is much in politics that seems to operate that way; recall Reagan as the “Teflon President”, Clinton as “Slick Willie” – all acknowledged and supposedly well known but to no real deleterious effect… I come back to my assertion that most people simply aren’t paying attention.