Click here for info on the Print Journal (and to purchase your copy)!

Just 162 Days Left: McCain and Able

By Mark Grueter

---------------------------------------

Lately, there has been much talk of John McCain being chosen as John Kerry’s running mate. The national media, including the New York Times, loves the idea of a Kerry-McCain ticket and has been pushing it hard over the past few weeks. Chris Matthews encourages speculation on the topic practically every day on both his cable and network programs. Even some Republican pundits such as Andrew Sullivan are savoring this “dream ticket.” Most people in the media enjoy the thought; more importantly, they actually believe it is a realistic possibility.

What at one time seemed inconceivable – McCain running on a Democratic ticket – has become more and more imaginable as the situation in Iraq deteriorates and as Bush’s approval rating declines. Few would have entertained the Kerry-McCain notion six months ago because, among other things, McCain is staunchly pro-life on abortion and in fact conservative with all of his social positions; he is a war hawk and he is squeamish on affirmative action. Plus, Republicans just don’t run with Democrats and vice versa. It hasn’t been done since Republican Abraham Lincoln, in the midst of the most divided period in our history, shrewdly chose Democrat Andrew Johnson in 1864 to be his running mate.

But, back to today, formidable Democratic Senators and Iraqi war opponents Joseph Biden and Bill Nelson have endorsed the would-be ticket. Why the enthusiasm? Well, Democrats want to win more than ever and they trust McCain. They also feel as though the nation is almost as “divided” as it has ever been. Sullivan elaborates, “McCain could say that this national crisis [Iraq] demands that he put country ahead of party and serve. His loyalty to his party would therefore be trumped by loyalty to his country.”

I agree that McCain running with Kerry is a logical and sane response to a presidential administration run amok. McCain has the credentials, the background (his stint in the Hanoi Hilton is particularly relevant given the recent events at Abu Ghraib) and the integrity to capture the American imagination.

However, there is one serious flaw to all of this eager speculation: McCain will simply not do it. Or, at least, that is what he says. Asked by Matthews on March 18 if he’d run with Kerry, McCain reacted: “Look, the answer is no, no, no. Categorically no.” And, more recently on May 15, the Times quotes McCain on the possibility of him running with Kerry: “I have totally ruled it out.” He is also quoted as saying that Bush should be re-elected “because I think he has led the nation with strength and clarity since Sept. 11.” He also said that Donald Rumsfeld is an “honorable man.” So, should not all of the talk end there?

If McCain does end up running, how does he explain himself? How does he reconcile his endorsement of the President with a decision to join up with that same President’s opponent? Is it sufficient merely to claim a change of heart? The pundits don’t seem to think this is a real challenge. I do. If McCain is the respectable, man-of-his-word type they all believe him to be, he might not be able to get away with such an extreme change of mind. By running with Kerry, McCain would undermine the very attributes – his character and honesty – that make him so adored by media types and politicians on both sides of the aisle. But he knows this, even if they don’t.

Besides, McCain would be the superstar of the ticket; Americans would want him to be President, not Kerry. This could create confusion. (By the way, what is wrong with John Edwards as the running mate? I have yet to hear one solid reason why Edwards would not be a winning choice).

I remember being told by certain pundits that Hillary Clinton would still run for President as a Democrat in this year’s election, as late as November of 2003 - this, despite her unequivocal and repeated assurances to the contrary. The McCain flair-up reminds me of this and suggests that certain journalists and politicians allow their fascination with a concept to blind them to reality. The guy said he wouldn’t do it. It’s as if we expect politicians to do the exact opposite of what they say.

The Times holds out hope and concludes the piece on Kerry-McCain with this ambiguous and probably misleading passage: ‘Asked if Senator Kerry had made such an offer, Mr. McCain said no without hesitation. But asked if the two men had ever discussed it, even casually, he paused for a moment. “No,” he said finally. “We really haven’t.” (italics mine)’ He paused, no doubt, because he really is thinking of doing it and they really have discussed it. Or, at least, that is what the Times intends to imply with this.

What we have here is a concerted and perhaps orchestrated effort on the part of the media to force McCain into the fold. I frankly hope they pull it off because it would certainly make the race far more interesting. And I think they’d win. But I fear it would not be as much of guaranteed victory as it appears from the outset, partly because Bush could effectively paint McCain as an opportunist and a hypocrite for jumping sides.

Click here for Grueter's previous column.

---------------------------------------

Mark Grueter is a writer living in New York City and the Managing Editor of Canon Magazine. He can be reached at grueter@methree.net.

© 2004 Me Three