This is an interview with Senator Joe Lieberman and Senator McCain from Fox News. It is from when Senator Lieberman came out to endorse Senator John McCain for President and explains why he chose to cross party lines and what it can do for the American people. Very positive message about bringing the nation together and getting things done!
The Boston Herald's editorial staff has now endorsed Senator McCain! See "Choice is clear McCain's the one".
“There are times in this nation’s history so perilous that they cry out for a steady, experienced leader, a person so trusted that we would put the fate of this country in his hands. This is one of those times, and Sen. John McCain is that person.
In an age when too many candidates are driven by polls and focus groups, fashioning and re-fashioning their “core” beliefs, McCain is a man of unwavering conviction and integrity. His values, his beliefs, his goals are what they were when he first entered public life, what they were in 2000 and what they will be a decade from now
On immigration reform, on tax reform, on campaign reform McCain has proven time and time again that he has the ability to reach across that increasingly wide partisan divide and make things happen."
This is from a couple of weeks ago, but it's a great article that presents why Senator McCain should be president. Just another feel good article about our favorite candidate.
For the full article, click here.
I recommend reading the whole article, but if you can't, then take a look at a few excerpts:
"Mr McCain's qualifications extend beyond character. Take experience. His range of interests as a senator has been remarkable, extending from immigration to business regulation. He knows as much about foreign affairs and military issues as anybody in public life. Or take judgment. True, he has a reputation as a hothead. But he's a hothead who cools down. He does not nurse grudges or agonise about vast conspiracies like some of his colleagues in the Senate.
He has also been right about some big issues. He was the first senior Republican to criticise George Bush for invading Iraq with too few troops, and the first to call for Donald Rumsfeld's sacking. He is one of the few Republicans to propose sensible policies on immigration and global warming.
Mr McCain's qualities are particularly striking if you contrast him with his leading rivals. His willingness to stick to his guns on divisive subjects such as immigration stands in sharp contrast to Mr Romney's oily pandering. Mr Romney likes to claim that his views on topics such as gay rights and abortion have “evolved”. But they have evolved in a direction that is strikingly convenient—perhaps through intelligent design. Can a party that mocked John Kerry really march into battle behind their very own Massachusetts flip-flopper?
McCain's Last Stand
He Still Has A Chance
By Fred Barnes, The Weekly Standard
December 15, 2007
Article Excerpt
John McCain finished a Q-and-A session with reporters here with a shot of his offbeat humor. "Thank you, jerks," he said. A few hours later, he suggested in a speech to the Greenville Rotary Club that former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan could head a commission to reform the federal tax system. If he's dead, McCain said, "prop him up and put some dark glasses on him, just like in Weekend at Bernie's."
McCain sneers at the importance of Iowa, whose caucuses on January 3 are the first contest in the Republican presidential race. "If I don't finish in the top 50 in Iowa, I'll still stay in the race," he told reporters in South Carolina last week. In Iowa the next day, McCain went out of his way in a televised debate to denounce the federal subsidy for ethanol, a popular program in the state.
So the old McCain is back, the flippant, contrarian candidate who came close to defeating George W. Bush for the Republican nomination in 2000. And amazingly enough, after his campaign to be nominee in 2008 all but collapsed this summer, McCain is experiencing a rebirth. He now has a chance--an outside chance, at least--of winning the Republican nomination.
Things large and small in the campaign have been moving McCain's way. The war in Iraq has turned sharply toward victory now that President Bush has adopted the strategy McCain had been recommending for several years. This is McCain's best issue and now a distinct plus for his campaign. And the immigration issue, a poisonous one for McCain, has become less intense since his immigrant-friendly approach lost in the Senate last summer.
Then there's the rise of Mike Huckabee, the ex-Arkansas governor. If he defeats Mitt Romney in Iowa next month--and polls show Huckabee ahead--that will disrupt Romney's early-state strategy and leave him vulnerable in the New Hampshire primary on January 8. To capture the nomination, McCain must win in New Hampshire. McCain, by the way, likes Huckabee and can't stand Romney.
Just as Romney has run into trouble, McCain's other rivals have as well. The campaign of Rudy Giuliani, the ex-New York City mayor, has stalled amid a burst of unfavorable media stories. Former senator Fred Thompson has failed to stir significant support among conservatives, his target group. Still, like Huckabee, Thompson is running hard against Romney in Iowa.
In his up and down campaign, McCain has already disproved two pieces of conventional wisdom. One is that Republicans are a primogeniture party that routinely makes the next major Republican figure in line the near-prohibitive frontrunner. McCain, having paid his dues in 2000, did lead the pack initially, but his campaign cratered in June from overspending and the unpopularity of his position on immigration.
The second is that primary debates don't matter. In McCain's case (and Huckabee's), however, televised debates have been a godsend. McCain's recovery began in a Fox News debate in New Hampshire on September 5, when he pugnaciously challenged Romney on the surge.
Romney said the surge--consisting of a troop buildup in Iraq and a new counterinsurgency strategy--was "apparently working." No, McCain responded sharply, "not apparently--it's working." Romney said he wanted to hear from General David Petraeus, the Iraq commander, to be certain. McCain took exception to that. The surge's success, he repeated, "is more than apparent. It's working."
McCain was instantly crowned by the media as the winner of the debate. In effect, he was rewarded for vociferously persevering in his support for a war the media opposes. Even a few of his advisers had urged him to downplay his pro-Iraq position.
Six weeks later, McCain scored again in the Fox News debate in Orlando. The day before at a campaign event at the nearby Shingle Creek Resort, he had zinged Hillary Clinton for proposing to spend $1 million for a Woodstock concert museum. And hours before the evening debate, he told a town meeting he'd missed the Woodstock concert in 1969 because he "was tied up at the time." He was a POW in North Vietnam.
His aides urged him to use the line in the debate. And he did--to great effect. After mentioning Clinton's Woodstock scheme, McCain said, "I wasn't there. I'm sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event." He paused as the audience laughed, then delivered the punchline. "I was tied up at the time." The crowd roared.
McCain is concentrating his campaign on New Hampshire, where "he's got to win," according to former senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who traveled with McCain last week. If Romney loses there, "he's out of the race," Gramm says. Then, adds McCain adviser Charles Black, McCain will win in Michigan and South Carolina and take command of the race.
"Deep in their hearts," Gramm says, "Republican primary voters know John McCain is the only great man running for president."
The leading candidates seeking the Republican nomination for president present an intriguing mix of priorities, personalities and life stories.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani inspired the city and nation with his confident leadership after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister from Arkansas, charms with homespun humor. Mitt Romney, the multimillionaire investment adviser from Massachusetts, exudes
executive discipline. As governors, both worked across the party divide to improve education and health care in their states.
Advertisement
Former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee brings an actor’s ease to his no-nonsense calls for a return to fiscal discipline.
Yet, for all their accomplishments on smaller stages, none can offer the tested leadership, in matters foreign and domestic, of Sen. John McCain of Arizona. McCain is most ready to lead America in a complex and dangerous world and to rebuild trust at home and abroad by inspiring confidence in his leadership.
In an era of instant celebrity, we sometimes forget the real heroes in our midst. The defining chapter of McCain’s life came 40 years ago as a naval aviator, when he was shot down over Vietnam. The crash broke both arms and a leg. When first seeing him, a fellow prisoner recalls thinking he wouldn’t live the night. He was beaten and kept in solitary confinement, held 5 years. He could have talked. He did not. Son of a prominent Navy admiral, he could have gained early release. He refused.
The one-time playboy emerged from prison a changed, more serious man. Elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1982 and the Senate in 1986, he has built an unconventional political career by taking stands based on principle, not party dogma, and frequently pursuing bipartisanship.
His first term was touched by scandal when the Senate rebuked him for meeting with savings-and-loan regulators on behalf of campaign donor Charles Keating Jr., who was later imprisoned. That ordeal steered him into championing government transparency and battling alongside Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold for the campaign-finance-reform bill that bears their names.
Time after time, McCain has stuck to his beliefs in the face of opposition from other elected leaders and the public. He has criticized crop and ethanol subsidies during two presidential campaigns in Iowa. He bucked his party and president by opposing the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. A year ago, in the face of growing criticism, he staunchly supported President Bush’s decision to increase troop strength in Iraq.
In this campaign, he continues to support comprehensive immigration reform — while watching his poll standings plunge. Some other Republican candidates refuse to acknowledge that climate change is a serious threat caused by human activity. McCain has worked on the issue for seven years and sponsored bills to limit greenhouse-gas emissions.
McCain would enter the White House with deep knowledge of national-security and foreign-policy issues. He knows war, something we believe would make him reluctant to start one. He’s also a fierce defender of civil liberties. As a survivor of torture, he has stood resolutely against it. He pledges to start rebuilding America’s image abroad by closing the Guantanamo prison and beginning judicial proceedings for detainees.
McCain has his flaws, too, of course. He can be hot-tempered, a trait that’s not helpful in conducting diplomacy. At 71, his age is a concern. The editorial board disagrees with him on a host of issues, especially his opposition to abortion rights and gay marriage. McCain foresees a “long, hard and difficult” deployment of troops in Iraq. The Register’s board has called for withdrawal as soon as it’s safely possible.
But with McCain, Americans would know what they’re getting. He doesn’t parse words. And on tough calls, he usually lands on the side of goodness — of compassion for illegal immigrants, of concern for the environment for future generations.
The force of John McCain’s moral authority could go a long way toward restoring Americans’ trust in government and inspiring new generations to believe in the goodness and greatness of America.
Dear Michigan Supporter,
I wanted to bring your attention to a new dynamic in the Presidential race.
Michigan is very similar to New Hampshire in that approximately 30% of voters consider themselves Independents. As you know, John McCain won Michigan in 2000 with the help of Independent voters who voted in the Republican Primary. This year there is not a contested Democrat Primary in Michigan and that bodes very well for John McCain because Independents in Michigan strongly favor McCain and they will vote in mass in the Republican Primary.
Independents are eligible to vote in the Republican Primary if they choose a Republican ballot at the polls. Several new polls have been released recently in Michigan and all of them show John McCain is surging among both segments of the GOP Primary electorate: Republicans and Independents. One of the polls correctly takes into account the role of Independents and shows that Senator McCain is actually leading in Michigan - ahead of Mitt Romney in his adopted home state.
This is obviously very good news for the McCain campaign. It is also potentially catastrophic for Mitt Romney and forced him to purchase television and radio ads in Michigan this week. His collapse in Iowa is being felt in Michigan.
Continue reading for more information about the latest polling conducted for Inside Michigan Politics Newsletter. MRG is a well-respected Michigan pollster not affiliated with our campaign in any way.
Breaking News: Michigan Polling Update
Recent polls released today in Michigan show John McCain is surging among Republicans and Independents across the state. One of the polls correctly takes into account the role of Independents and shows that John McCain is actually leading in Michigan - ahead of Mitt Romney in his adopted home state:
John McCain- 21%
Mitt Romney- 18%
Mike Huckabee- 16%
On MTV, John McCain proves he can hang with voters a quarter his age.
Michael Scherer
Dec. 04, 2007 | For at least Monday night, John McCain was the hippest old guy in presidential politics. He bucked the traditional Republican aversion to that basic cable network that invented reality television, lionized the crotch grab and created the first major bisexual dating show. He became the only Republican candidate this cycle to accept an invitation for a town hall meeting with young voters on MTV.
"My friends, I'm not the youngest candidate in this race. You know that. But I am the most experienced," the 72-year-old said upon taking the stage, which was surrounded by red, white and blue lights, like the inside of a patriotic microwave oven.
Then he tried to make a funny. "I'm older than Frankenstein and I've got a few scars," he said, before realizing that didn't make any sense. "I'm older than dirt and I've got more scars than Frankenstein," he tried again. "Screwed up that line." The audience of students of Southern New Hampshire University laughed. The old guy was trying to please. They appreciated it.
Over the next hour, he spoke on a number of issues, passionately making the case for the current military policy in Iraq, speaking about the dangers of global warming and pledging to fix Medicare and Social Security for the younger generation. He said he supported federal stem cell research, despite his pro-life beliefs, wanted to increase government aide for college, and said he would have made the genocide in Darfur "a higher priority" than President Bush.
At another point, when asked how he would have governed differently than President Bush, McCain said that he would have called the nation to public service after the attacks of Sept. 11. "I would not have asked Americans to go shopping or take a trip," he said.
He said he would not accept Sen. Hillary Clinton as his vice president, and confessed to a rather historic taste in music. "My musical progress stopped with the Beatles and Abba." When asked about immigration, he joked, "Uh. This meeting is adjourned."
By the end of the night, the MTV computers showed that people watching the debate online had a far more positive view of him than they had when he began. And he did that despite some blistering words for the Internet golden boy, Texas Rep. Ron Paul. "Frankly, Ron Paul is wrong," he said, after he was asked about Paul's view on the Iraq war. "They aren't fighting over there for oil. They aren't fighting over there for empire. And they aren't fighting over there illegally."
It was the sort of night that made you wonder why he was only the third candidate to accept MTV's invitation. (On the Democratic side, both John Edwards and Barack Obama have participated in similar forums.) What do Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have to fear?
HAVING SPENT much of the past year mired in legislative trench warfare over Iraq, advocates in Congress seeking a mandatory withdrawal of troops are now refusing to pass funding for our forces deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan.
For Congress to fail to provide the funds needed by our soldiers in the field is inexcusable under any circumstances -- but it is especially disappointing right now, coming at the very moment when Gen. David Petraeus and his troops are achieving the kind of progress in Iraq that few would have dared imagine possible just a few months ago.
We recently traveled to Iraq, where we saw and heard firsthand about the remarkable transformation that our brave men and women in uniform have succeeded in bringing about this year.
As every major news outlet now acknowledges, security has improved dramatically across Iraq since Gen. Petraeus took command and began implementing a bold new counterinsurgency strategy -- the so-called "surge." Today, rocket and mortar attacks have dropped to their lowest levels in 21 months. Car bombs and suicide attacks in Baghdad have plummeted 70 percent. Iraqi civilian casualties are sharply down throughout Iraq. And the number of U.S. soldiers killed in action has fallen for five straight months and is now at the lowest level in nearly two years.
Simply put: a year ago, al-Qaida was winning in Iraq. Now we are.
Our soldiers know they have seized the momentum in this fight.
Idealistic and innovative, they rightly recognize what has happened this year under Gen. Petraeus as one of the most extraordinary turnarounds in American military history.
As a result of the hard-won gains our troops have secured, Gen. Petraeus has been able to initiate a drawdown of U.S. forces. The first 5,000 American troops are now on their way out of Iraq, with more likely to follow in the months ahead. However, we should not have an automatic timetable for withdrawing brigades. Gen. Petraeus should decide the size of the force he needs to maintain security and keep our enemies on the run.
The success that Gen. Petraeus and his troops have achieved could provide the foundation for a new bipartisan consensus about Iraq in Washington. All of us, after all, want our troops to succeed in Iraq so that they can begin to come home with honor.
Unfortunately, too many Democrats have thus far been reluctant to welcome the reality of progress -- instead searching for ways to deny or disparage it.
In particular, Democrats have seized on the lackluster performance of the Iraqi government to insist that we should abandon Gen. Petraeus' successful strategy and withdraw far more of our troops, far faster, than he recommends.
This would be a terrible mistake.
There is no question Iraq's national leaders must do more to promote reconciliation and improve governance in the months ahead.
But the fact is, there has been enormous political progress in Iraq at the local and provincial levels thanks to the surge, as Sunni and Shiite leaders have stepped forward to fight against the extremists in their communities.
Building on these gains is going to require deft diplomacy and subtle statecraft from the United States -- not declarations of defeat.
And whatever the failings of the imperfect, fledgling democracy in Baghdad, they do not justify abandoning it to the al-Qaida fanatics and Iranian-backed terrorists who are trying to destroy it.
And make no mistake. Despite the progress we have achieved this year, there is no cause for complacency. Just as we have managed to turn failure into success in 2007, we can likewise turn success back into failure in 2008, if we are not careful.
As Brig. Gen. Joe Fil, the commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad, recently put it, al-Qaida in Iraq is now off balance, but they will come swinging back at us, if we give them the chance.
That is why Congress' failure to fund our troops is so profoundly reckless.
Nine months ago, when Gen. Petraeus took command in Baghdad, people of good conscience could disagree about whether his new counterinsurgency strategy would succeed. After so many mistakes and missteps by the Bush administration in Iraq, many Americans were understandably skeptical about the possibility of success.
Now, however, the evidence is unequivocal. The surge is working.
Rather than holding hostage the funding for our troops in the field and writing off the hard-won gains they are secured, it is time for Democrats and Republicans alike to recognize the extraordinary progress that Gen. Petraeus' strategy has achieved -- and build a new political consensus around it.
Just as we demand Iraqi leaders take advantage of the success of the surge to set aside their sectarian agendas and pursue peace, so too it is time for Congress to stop playing senseless partisan games and instead fund our troops -- who have accomplished so much -- without delay. They deserve nothing less.
By Andrew Sullivan
Competence, courage, and conviction are enormously important for our next President to possess. No one has a better understanding of U.S. interests and dangers right now than does McCain. He was right on the mistakes made by the Bush administration in prosecuting the Islamic terrorist war in Iraq and he is being proved right on the way forward both there and worldwide.
McCain is pro-life. Always has been. He fights against special-interest and pork-barrel spending, and high spending in general, which ticks off liberals and many in the GOP who have wallowed at the public trough. Yet he also has the proven ability, unique among the contenders, to work across the political divide that has led our government into petty bickering when important problems need to be solved, - the Manchester Union Leader endorsing John McCain in New Hampshire.
My only qualm with this assessment is the notion that the best way ahead in Iraq is an indefinite continuation of the occupation. But on this, I still trust McCain's judgment more than I do Romney's or, God help us, Giuliani's. And he was right in predicting tactical success for the surge, and I was too pessimistic. I'll be interviewing the senator tomorrow. A reader seconds:
I'd been leaning McCain for a few days now, but the debate the other night clinched it for this disenchanted Republican who voted Democrat in '06.
Rudy came across as the small and petty man that he is. His attacks on Romney were immature and sleazy, just like the man himself, as we now know from his use of taxpayer dollars and government property to tend to Judith Nathan. Romney, meanwhile, continues to be the most cynical candidate around, parroting lines that he thinks conservatives want to hear, even though everyone can see through them. Fred Thompson is good but pointless. He clearly doesn't want to be in this race. His wife must really want to be First Lady. Paul is hopeless. Huckabee is at least sincere, but I just feel that nominating him is tantamount to giving away the store. He's a big-government liberal with the compassion of Jimmy Carter and a nanny-state busybody of the highest order. I'd rather have the Bitch. At least she'd balance the budget. You know, like her husband did.
But McCain is a man of honor who is reasonably conservative and who would move the Republican Party forward in lots of important ways. Finally we would have a president that agrees that it's not okay to torture or wiretap without a warrant or suspend habeas corpus. Finally we would have a president who agrees that climate change is real and who wants to do something about it. Finally we would have a president who believes in science. And all of this without giving in to a big-government liberal agenda with Huckabee or Obama. McCain wouldn't raise taxes, would cut spending, and would be able to tackle immigration and entitlements in a bipartisan way. He was right about the surge and he could finish the job in Iraq with honor. Sure, McCain has pissed me off over the years on this or on that, but he remains the least imperfect choice in a highly imperfect field of candidates on both sides.
As such, I've made my decision. I'm backing McCain. Further, I hope that Obama takes down Hillary and clinches the Democratic nomination. A McCain/Obama race would be one about policy, not personalities, and would be a unifying event, not a polarizing one.
By Publisher Joseph McQuaid, The Union Leader
December 2, 2007
On Jan. 8, New Hampshire Republicans will make one of the most important choices for their party and nation in the history of our presidential primary. Their choice ought to be John McCain.
We don't agree with him on every issue. We disagree with him strongly on campaign finance reform. What is most compelling about McCain, however, is that his record, his character, and his courage show him to be the most trustworthy, competent, and conservative of all those seeking the nomination. Simply put, McCain can be trusted to make informed decisions based on the best interests of his country, come hell or high water.
Competence, courage, and conviction are enormously important for our next President to possess. No one has a better understanding of U.S. interests and dangers right now than does McCain. He was right on the mistakes made by the Bush administration in prosecuting the Islamic terrorist war in Iraq and he is being proved right on the way forward both there and worldwide.
McCain is pro-life. Always has been. He fights against special-interest and pork-barrel spending, and high spending in general, which ticks off liberals and many in the GOP who have wallowed at the public trough. Yet he also has the proven ability, unique among the contenders, to work across the political divide that has led our government into petty bickering when important problems need to be solved.
We have known John McCain for many years. We will write more about him in the days ahead. For now, we leave you with this to ponder:
When McCain was shot down and taken prisoner by the North Vietnamese, he was repeatedly beaten. When his captors discovered that his father was a top U.S. admiral, they ordered him released for propaganda purposes. But McCain refused, insisting that longer-held prisoners be released before him. So they beat him some more. He never gave in then, and he won't give in to our enemies now.
John McCain is the man to lead America.
San Francisco Chronicle (CA): The Great Man In The Race
By Debra J. Saunders
Wednesday's CNN/You Tube debate began with a ditty by Chris Nandor of Snohomish, Wash., on the eight GOP hopefuls. Sen. John McCain, Nandor sang, "is loved by many, but hated by the rest."
Why do so many Republicans loathe John McCain?
No Republican candidate has been better in pushing to make sure that the sacrifices made by U.S. troops in Iraq are not made in vain - and there is no issue more important than this war. McCain spent Thanksgiving visiting the front, and he carried back the message he heard from those serving: "Let us win."
McCain has spared no one - including President Bush and his administration - in his righteous desire to do right by the troops. "I am the only one on this stage," McCain noted, "that said the Rumsfeld strategy was failing and was doomed to failure. I'm the only one on this stage that said we've got to have a new strategy, and that's the strategy we're employing now."
Maybe that's part of the problem. When I asked Bill Whalen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and former adviser to ex-Gov. Pete Wilson, why so many Republicans hate McCain, Whalen saw two main reasons: Much of McCain's reputation "has come at George Bush's expense."
And: "He's too beloved by the media." Too bad the media are a fickle crew, who this go-round are smitten with the cuddly conservative, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.
It's more than a bit bizarre. When McCain called The Rev. Jerry Falwell an agent of "intolerance" in 2000, the media loved him. When McCain appeared next to Falwell at Liberty University last year, pundits labeled the event - a savvy political move to reach out to Falwell's values voters - a sellout to the religious right. So who's their new crush? An ordained Southern Baptist minister. Go figure.
GOP voters resented profligate spending under the now-dethroned Republican leadership in Congress. They should love McCain, who crusaded against earmarks and pork-barrel spending when it didn't win him many friends in power circles.
Perhaps the problem is that McCain is not just talk. When Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist asked the candidates if they would sign the ATR pledge not to raise taxes, McCain said no, "My pledge and my record is up to the American people, not up to any organization."
The Norquist exchange may signal a sea change in Republican politics. Huckabee, Mitt Romney and Tom Tancredo of Colorado said they would sign the ATR pledge, and have. Rudy Giuliani said he would, but hasn't. (In October, an aide told me that Giuliani "doesn't sign pledges.")
Because it is now clear that no-new-taxes pledges don't tamp down government spending, McCain, and Republican rivals Fred Thompson, Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter said they oppose tax hikes, but refused to sign a pledge they are not 100 percent certain to keep.
Republican readers often tell me that they will never forgive McCain for his 2002 campaign finance reform bill that restricts political advertising. Come on. Thanks to well-heeled lawyers, the courts are gutting McCain-Feingold. To them I say, let go of it. There are more important issues - like a war.
Americans say that they are looking for strong leaders. In McCain, you see a man who doesn't shift his positions just to please people, yet is realistic enough to realize when it is right to bend.
McCain still was wrong when he argued that this year's failed Senate immigration bill would not have provided "amnesty" to illegal immigrants. But he has had the good sense to let voters know that he has heard their outrage and understands that border enforcement must precede any measures to set a path toward legalization for qualifying illegal immigrants.
My position on immigration reform is closer to those of Romney and Giuliani, but who do they think they're kidding as they preen about how tough they've been on the issue? In a different time, they had a more forgiving attitude toward illegal immigrants. McCain is simply more honest about why he has changed.
I want the government to be much tougher on enforcing immigration policies with employers, but I also want a president with heart. Or as McCain put it, "We need to sit down as Americans and recognize that these are God's children as well."
Maybe McCain's problem is that he tells people things they don't want to hear.
I still say that now-Attorney General Michael Mukasey was right to tell the Senate that he would not classify waterboarding (simulated drowning during interrogation) as illegal. That said, when McCain, who was tortured during his five years in a Vietnamese POW camp, says that as commander in chief, "we will never allow torture to take place in the United States of America," I'll salute.
New York Times columnist David Brooks described McCain as the only great man from either party in the race.
As McCain said of his support of the Senate immigration bill, "I came to the Senate not to do the easy things, but the hard things." But do voters want the hard things?
Rasmussen Reports: Election 2008: Obama vs. McCain And Romney
Obama, McCain Tied at 44%; Obama Leads Romney by Nine
Arizona Senator John McCain has struggled in the race for the GOP nomination, but he continues to be competitive in general-election match-ups with top Democrats. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds him now tied 44% to 44% with Democratic Senator Barack Obama.
This match-up has been tight for much of the fall. In mid-November, Obama had a three-point advantage over McCain. In mid-October, it was McCain over Obama by a single point (see match-up history).
The new Rasmussen Reports election poll found that Obama enjoys a nine-point edge of 48% to 39% over former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Obama has led Romney in eleven consecutive Rasmussen Reports polls. In November Romney was just six points behind Obama, but he lagged by nine in October. (see match-up history).
A separate survey found Obama in a toss-up with Rudy Giuliani and a comfortable lead over Fred Thompson.
Senator McCain is often respected even by conservatives who sharply disagree with him on issues like illegal immigration, global warming, or the treatment of captured terrorists. But he does only a few points better than Romney among conservatives, although he has a 5% advantage among Republicans.
McCain-viewed favorably by 52% now-also attracts a few percent more Democrats than Romney, and 5% more liberals. He has an 8% edge over Romney with moderates.
McCain is perceived as politically moderate by a plurality of 49% of likely voters. Just 30% view him as politically conservative.
Romney is seen as conservative by 38%, moderate by 31%. He is viewed favorably by 41%, unfavorably by 40% (see key stats and general election match-ups for all Republican candidates).
Senator Obama is most often regarded as liberal (44%), but many (33%) see him as moderate. His is now viewed favorably by 44% of voters nationwide.
Romney and McCain are among four candidates competing for second place nationally in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll. But Romney is still a man to beat in early primary states. He and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee are the frontrunners in Iowa while Romney has a substantial lead in New Hampshire.
Obama has consistently placed second in national polling for the Democratic nomination. However, he is one of three candidates essentially tied for the lead in Iowa. The Senator from Illinois has also pulled to within single digits of frontrunner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire.
Washington Post: Principles Amid The GOP Pack
By David Broder
If the Republican Party really wanted to hold on to the White House in 2009, it's pretty clear what it would do. It would grit its teeth, swallow its doubts and nominate a ticket of John McCain for president and Mike Huckabee for vice president -- and president-in-waiting.
Those two are far from front-runners. They trail Mitt Romney in Iowa and New Hampshire and lag behind Rudy Giuliani in national surveys of Republican voters. But, in a series of debates, including last week's CNN-YouTube extravaganza, McCain and Huckabee have been notable for their clarity, character and, yes, simple humanity.
From everything I have heard on the campaign trail, it's obvious that they are the pair who have earned the widest respect among the eight Republican candidates themselves. McCain is the eldest and the most honored, not only for what he endured as a Vietnam prisoner of war but as a principled battler for what he considers essential on Iraq and other national security issues.
Huckabee, who previously was known only to those of us who cover state government and governors, has been the surprise discovery of the campaign season. His combination of religious principle, good humor, tolerance and clear passion on education and health care complements McCain's muscular foreign policy and aversion to wasteful domestic spending.
The two of them seem often to be operating on a different -- and higher -- plane than the quarrelsome Giuliani and Romney, whose mutual contempt is as palpable as it is persuasive.
Fred Thompson appears perpetually grumpy -- a presence hard to imagine inhabiting the Oval Office. The three House members -- Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter -- are exercising their lungs but running for exercise, happy to be part of the proceedings but with no hope of being nominated.
What sets McCain and Huckabee apart is most evident in the way they treat the contentious issue of illegal immigration. Both of them have been burned by it -- Huckabee in a losing battle with his legislature over tuition breaks for children of illegal immigrants; McCain for his sponsorship of President Bush's comprehensive immigration reform. Both now acknowledge -- as everyone must -- that the failure of the federal government to secure the southern border has produced broad public outrage.
But, unlike the others, who seem to take their rhetorical cues from the rabidly anti-immigrant Tancredo, Huckabee and McCain always remember that those who struggle to reach the United States across the deserts or rivers of the Southwest are human beings drawn here by the promise of better lives for their families.
After outlining the failed Senate effort to pass a bill that included a temporary guest worker program and a pathway to earned citizenship for the illegal immigrants already living here, McCain said, "What we've learned is that the American people want the borders enforced. We must . . . secure the borders first. But then . . . we need to sit down as Americans and recognize these are God's children as well, and they need some protections under the law and they need some of our love and compassion." That answer was interrupted by applause.
Huckabee was asked to defend a bill he sponsored that the questioner said "gave illegal aliens a discount for college in Arkansas by allowing them to pay lower in-state tuition rates."
The former governor corrected him. The bill, he said, "would have allowed those children who had been in our schools their entire school life the opportunity to have the same scholarship that their peers had, who had also gone to high school with them and sat in the same classrooms. . . . It wasn't about out-of-state tuition."
Romney was not appeased. He said Huckabee sounded like a Massachusetts liberal, giving the taxpayers' money to people who are here illegally.
To which Huckabee replied: "In all due respect, we're a better country than to punish children for what their parents did. We're a better country than that." He, too, was applauded.
I think we are that better country. And I hope the Republicans agree.
Newsweek: McCain Gets Momentum - Can he make a comeback?
By Eleanor Clift
A funny thing happened on the way to New Hampshire. John McCain got his mojo back. Meeting with reporters in his campaign headquarters, McCain, back from Iraq and on his way to South Carolina, held forth on a variety of subjects in the easy, straight-talking way that earned him a special place in political journalists' hearts in 2000, and that still sets him apart from almost every other leading contender for the presidency on either side.
He had just come from taping the Charlie Rose show, an hour's exploration of his inner feelings, he said, and he seemed eager to get to Iraq and the gains made by the buildup of U.S. troops. "John Edwards used to call it the McCain surge. He doesn't anymore. I wish he would," McCain said. With roughly half of Americans now saying the war in Iraq is going well, according to a Pew Research Center poll, McCain hopes his firmness in sticking with the war will translate into a first- or second-place finish in New Hampshire.
It's a long shot for a candidate who during the summer had to shed much of his staff and is operating on a tight budget, but McCain seems comfortable and on his game. The Republican race is so fluid that almost anything can happen. And for an electorate searching for authenticity, the new McCain is the old McCain, the candidate we saw eight years ago who speaks his mind and whose personal story brings a moral dimension unmatched by his rivals. The questions now are whether Republicans will see McCain as their most electable nominee and whether the independent voters that launched him in 2000 will return to him in New Hampshire. "His destiny is out of his hands," says Matthew Dowd, who was George W. Bush's pollster in 2000 and 2004 and is now unaffiliated with any candidate or party.
For McCain to make a comeback, several things have to fall in place. Mike Huckabee has to win Iowa or do damage to Mitt Romney. The two current GOP front runners, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, have to continue the demolition derby they kicked off in Wednesday evening's YouTube debate on CNN, jabbing each other about who's tougher on immigration and crime. The hint of scandal around Giuliani has to grow. That would leave the voters faced with Huckabee, who raised taxes in Arkansas to build roads (heresy for conservatives); a lethargic Fred Thompson, who can't seem to stir himself for the big fight, or McCain, a credible commander in chief who's always been pro-life. McCain could be the last man standing.
Reminded by a reporter at Monday's "sandwiches and scoops" session that Thompson had made fund-raising calls for him before entering the race, McCain quipped, "I'd like to see those phone lists." McCain is not coy about what he has to do. He has to win in New Hampshire, or come close enough to claim the "Comeback Kid" mantle that Bill Clinton rode to victory after finishing second in 1992. He also has a stake in how the Democratic race shakes out. If the Democratic contest seems settled by the Iowa returns, McCain would benefit because independents, fully a third of the New Hampshire electorate, generally flock to the party where the action is. In other words, if Hillary Clinton, the front runner nationally and in New Hampshire, wins Iowa, she will look like a foregone conclusion, and independents won't want to waste their vote on a race that's already over.
Voters in New Hampshire don't have to declare party allegiance until Election Day, and if the independents decide to play on the Republican side, McCain could be the beneficiary. Here's an example of how powerful this dynamic is: if it hadn't been for the excitement around McCain in 2000, Bill Bradley would have beaten Al Gore in New Hampshire, and perhaps snatched the nomination. "A Clinton victory in Iowa would be the best thing that could possibly happen to John McCain," says Bill Galston, a former domestic-policy adviser in the Clinton White House who is now with the Brookings Institution. "And if that doesn't happen, [second best would be] an Edwards victory, because Edwards is not going to be much of a player in New Hampshire. An Obama victory would be trouble for Hillary--but a disaster for McCain."
McCain is finally running the campaign he should have from the start. Will it be enough? It may. The history of presidential primary politics is littered with surprises: failed front runners, and dead-in-the-water winners.
