Dole 2008

Not only are many conservatives not expecting him to win, I would bet that many do not really want McCain to win.

Remember the last time we had a presidential election when the White House was controlled by the GOP and the Congress was controlled by the Democrats?

That's right. 1992 is the correct answer.

Well, today we are in that same situation. And it's hard for the conservative base to get enthusiastic about a GOP win at the White House level when they are about 90 percent certain that the Democrats will retain both the US Senate and the US House. After all, a Republican President, under those circumstances, can only veto liberal legislation, but conservative legislation won't get passed by a Democrat Congress.

So, the result is that the Republican party, with a McCain victory, gets a majority of the responsibility for governing but a minority of the power over how the country is run.

The Bush tax cuts are scheduled to expire in 2010. Increasing taxes at a time of economic slowdown is a recipie for slowing down the economy even futher. So, while the economy has not yet "contracted" (which is part of the definition of recession), a stealth tax increase that occurs without a vote of Congress and a signature by the president could tip the scales and put the US economy into a "statistical" (as opposed to an "emotional") recession.

Why not let the Obama, Pelosi and Reid deal with the tax increase that they actually want? Why should a Republican president baby-sit Democrat legislative governance?

I have no idea.

Obama '08

Ando,

I naively thought that, traditionally, in a time of war everyone needed to sacrifice, even the Uberrich. But along comes W. and "voila" we cut taxes!

Given a choice between a policy of tax increases (or not having a tax cut) and a policy of reducing social-welfare spending (education, farm subsidies, medicare, medicaid, social security), I would prefer reducing social-welfare spending.

As John F. Kennedy said in his January 1963 state of the union address, tax cuts stimulate the economy. But spending more money to subsidize consumption actually can hurt an economy as the government competes with the productive private sector for resources.

Right now I think we need to cut the corporate income tax rate. Many European nations have lower tax rates than the US (especially Ireland) and corporations often "shop around" for lower tax rates, which can lead to the loss of jobs in the US simply because the US Congress doesn't want to cut the corporate tax rate and appear to be "in bed with the big corporations."

It's amazing how when you strip away the emotion of socialist/populist rhetoric, there isn't much "there" there.

Most importantly, none of the Beltway conservatives, young or old, can give you a conservative argument in favor of McCain's election other than (a) "Obama would be worse" and (b) "What about judges? ... The GOP is already psychologically defeated.

That's because there is no other conservative argument for the man. What's more, he was the candidate most like Bush in the primaries, especially on foreign intervention and immigration, so it's fitting that he go down in flames. If we have to chose between a Democrat and a Democrat, why not go with the Democrat?

Methinks, methinks, methinks Jonathon has a feeling McCain will win.

www.bettyfordland.com

I just wonder if it is finally time for a Libertarian candidate to make a big run at things. If the GOP concerts GA Bob Barr could still make it interesting. I think we might actually be seeing the complete rebirth of third party politics or a complete empathic collapse of the whole system. To be honest I don't trust either one.

I do wish conservatives would take a chill pill. It is only July.

If Conservatives do not win it will be their fault not McCains. He can only do so much. We had a primary where conservatives adn Republicans were divided into three groups and it appears to me that some just want to continue to be at each other throats. Note Mrs Lopez (Huckabee is a Christian Socialist!!!) piece on Huckabee today at the National Review.

If the Neo ons, Cruncy Cons ,Social Cons, Fiscal Cons, Liberatarian Cons, do not realize they are are one true heirs of Conservativsm and the rest are not RINOS we shall lose. I used to be ina party where we coul dall live togther. Not anymore it appears. I Still have hope but it is time for people to realize we had a Primary and the voters decided. If they can't get over it oh well

jweb says: "Honestly? This feels more like '64 than '96."

Rawlins says: What's that sound when they said 'B 64'? BINGO

jh,

I've watched McCain very carefully over these past 10 to 12 years and I have not so much been unimpressed with what I have seen, I have been disgusted.

Take the issue of the Bush tax cuts, as an example.

It's January 2001 and the country has just entered a recession. Bush has just taken office and his main agenda is passing a tax cut to stimulate the economy to get it out of recession. In this sense Bush borrows a page from John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.

The Senate is split 50 to 50, so Bush needs every Republican vote. Bush ends up getting 48 of them, all of them except Lincoln Chafee of the deep blue state of Rhode Island (about as liberal as Massachusetts) and John McCain from the medium red state of Arizona. Even Arlen Specter voted more "to the Right" on those tax cuts than McCain did.

At the time, McCain used Teddy Kennedy's language to denounce the Bush tax cuts, as a givaway to the rich. In the primaries he said that he only opposed them because he was worried about the deficit.

Today, Obama and the Democrats can simply quote McCain and "prove" that McCain is supporting a givaway to the rich because McCain now supports making the Bush tax cuts permanent.

So, in some sense, McCain has himself to blame when conservatives don't get all fired up for his campaign. Many of them believe that he would be better than Obama. But some, like me, are still considering Obama, thinking that a Democrat who says he is a Democrat is better than someone who is totally unpredictable, like McCain.

Rod,

This comparison (between Obama/McCain and Clinton/Dole) lacks merit. The similarity in age between McCain and Dole notwithstanding, I think a better comparison can be made to the Carter/Ford race in 1976.

It's hard to appreciate this now ... but the media and the Dem. Party were both excited and mystified by Carter's appeal in the early summer of 1976. Going into the GOP Convention, Ford was something like 25 points BEHIND Carter in the polling matchups. By Election Day, Ford came within 2% points of beating Carter in the popular vote ... and was competitive in the Electoral College.

Ford was NOT popular with the conservative wing of his Party. His opponent won the evangelical vote and won back several Southern states lost to the GOP in recent elections. Ford represented the Party in power, which was held responsible for high energy prices, a war gone sour, an unpopular President, and a sagging economy. Ford was tagged with all this by the Democrats, who were hungry after 8 years out of the WH and controlled both Houses of Congress. Sound familiar?

Will the popular Obama stumble this fall the way Carter did in the fall of 1976? Will the voters entertain second thoughts about Obama in November 2008 the way they did with Carter in November 1976. Will the tortoise catch up with the hare?

The remarkable thing about this election at this point is not the poor morale among GOP operatives. It's that Obama's lead in the polls over McCain is averaging only 4-to-6 points ... despite all the media adulation and hype for Obama.

Reaganite in NYC,

Your 11:59 pm analysis was super. Ford was an incumbent president while McCain is not. But the from-out-of-nowhere similarity between Carter of 76 and Obama of 08 can't be dismissed.

Another dissimilarity, however, is that Carter was a Southern Democrat and that might have been more important in putting Carter over the top than we appreciate.

Did you know that Ford beat Carter in the electoral college and in the popular vote outside of the South? That's something that Obama can not count on, given the major changes in Southern politics since then. But on the other hand, the rest of the country is more Democrat-leaning today.

Still, if Obama were to win, he would be the first Democrat from outside the South to win a presidential election since John Kennedy in 1960 (and even that one was a squeaker).

I am very conflicted about this race, and have not decided who to vote for. But I admit, every time recently that I have watched a McCain speech, I cannot believe how awful he is. What happened to the McCain from 2000? Is it just that he's older? It's as if he's never given a public speech before. I don't think a president should be chosen on charisma and rhetorical ability alone, but if something doesn't change drastically, Obama will be president simply because he's eloquent and inspiring. So far, McCain is an embarrassment.

What would have happened if Bob Dole had picked Dan Quayle as his running mate?

If McCain picks Senator Thune, as rumors say he may, we'll find out.

In fairness it was only 29000 dollars which I guess it about 3 cars worth since it was 9000 in 2003.

Ando,

I read history books all the time. The most recent one was about the Great Depression.

The title of the book is: The Forgotten Man, A New History of the Great Depression. Author: Amity Shlaes

Excellent book. A very readable book about the Great Depression from the vantage point of an economist.