Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
SPONSORED BY
Full Post
Posted Tuesday, March 04, 2008 10:16 PM

McCain Sounds Impressively Presidential

Howard Fineman

I'm watching Sen. John McCain give what amounts to his nomination acceptance speech. He is talking about service, about America as the last best hope of mankind, about fighting the Taliban and his pride in the decision to destroy the regime of Saddam Hussein. He wants to win the battle for the hearts and minds of Islam. He wants to defend free-trade treaties and improve education. He promises lower taxes and regulation. He promises an energy policy that relies on alternative sources. "We don't hide from history, we make history," McCain said.

There was no talk of a 100-year war in Iraq, but a challenge to the Democrats to explain how they would end it without producing a genocidal ethnic cleansing. In short, he sounds presidential, impressively so.

He says how he will run: travel the country and hold town halls everywhere. It is who he is and what he does. He even manages to portray himself as a man who eschews ambition, even though he has been running for president of the United States.

Advertisement

I have to admit--I am duty bound to admit--that I have underestimated McCain time and again. I didn’t think he had the muscle or the message to defeat then-Gov. George W. Bush in 2000, but McCain nearly pulled off a miracle. I thought he was yesterday's news last fall, when his 2008 campaign was going nowhere. Even after his repeat miracle in New Hampshire, I was not convinced that he could get from there to here.

McCain is no angel, God knows. But he is a fighter, and a winner, and he is going to be harder for the Democrats to beat than they may think. Don't let his age distract you. He has more zest for battle in him then men half his age. And he has a message: I am a soldier at heart, not a politician.

Let's see who salutes.

Tag(s):
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: Cerberus1 (March 11, 2008 at 6:55 AM)

I believe Hillary will eventually lose to Barack for the nomination. With combined regular and super delegates he is up by 150 and has a lead of about 600,000 in the popular vote. If one takes the remaining contests- not counting Florida and Michigan for the moment- then it is about dead even for both of them in those races. The remaining states/territories of Pennsylvania, W. Virginia, Kentucky, Guam, and Puerto Rico favor her with about 225 regular delegates and 22.5 million in total population. The states of N. Carolina, Mississippi (voting today), Oregon, Montana, S. Dakota, and Indiana favor him with about 215 regular delegates and around 22 million in population. A tiny, slim edge for her but not enough to catch him if the other predicted numbers play out such as 50% of registered Dem voters turning out in each of their remaining states and each of them winning their remaining states by 8-12 points. Per these numbers she gains an extra 10 regular delegates. That's it. He'll still lead by about 140 Delegates and close to 600,000 in popular vote.  

That leaves just Michigan and Florida. Currently she beat him by 300,000 votes in Florida and 38 delegates. She also got 330,000 popular votes and 73 regular delegates in Michigan whereas about 250,000 popular votes and 55 regular delegates are listed as "uncommitted". If she has a do-over in Florida and Michigan it won't matter. His name will be on ballots and he can campaign. Of the 1.7 million who voted in Florida lets say Hillary gets 55% to his 45%. That means she would gain about 260,000 more votes and about 18-20 delegates. He now leads by about 120 delegates and about 340,000 in votes. There were 600,000 who voted in Michigan and 128 delegates. Hillary could have a solid win of 60% of the vote- even better than her previous 55% when he wasn't on the ballot- and she would only gain 120,000 in popular vote and about 20 delegates. He now leads by 220,000 votes and about 100 delegates. That's it. No more except the super delegates who are still uncommitted. He wins the popular and the delegate count. There is no way they over turn it. She got her do overs. The people got to vote. They won't even wait till the convention at the end of August. Hillary would tear the Democratic Party in two. John McCain would have 6 months to campaign and catch up in funds. The Dem winner after the convention would have only 2 months to campaign, have depleted funds and a fractured party. The do-overs take place in June and the Super Delegates settle it quickly...for Barack.


Posted By: Cerberus1 (March 11, 2008 at 5:03 AM)

Hmmm. The way the Dem's are tearing each other apart, McCain stands a reasonable chance to win this thing.


Posted By: RavenMaven (March 11, 2008 at 2:17 AM)

I completely agree with axtell1's comments. By now, we as Americans should recognize partisan spin doctoring when we hear it, and as usual, these campaigns are full of it. I am particularly concerned about the massive swoon of support for Obama by the media and celebrities. Obama has been elevated to "Rock Star" status, but has not released his first song yet. Why are we supposed to think he could do anything remarkable? Because HE SAYS he can do something remarkable? That is a joke. My dog has better qualifications to be President than he does. He is a one term senator, who has spent half of his time as senator campaigning to be President. Didn't he WANT to be a Senator?He is not doing a very good job of it.  Or was that all just to give some shred of credibility to run for president?Hmmm. In my view, if you have not been at the helm of large organization, governed a populated state, achieved very high ranking military status, or served several terms as an influential senator or cabinet member, you don't need to be running for President. Electing Obama would be akin to hiring some mid level manager from the marketing department at NBC to be the CEO of General Electric. No way he has the knowledge and experience to be successful, and if he was successful, it would be pure luck.

I am amazed at what the democratic party has put forward as presidential candidates over the past 30 years. Not one has been a seriously "presidential" candidate. Dukakis? Mondale? Kerry? ( perhaps the most presidential, but that isn't saying much) Clinton?( Was doing 'okay' until he decided to start bonking interns) Carter? I am actually waiting for a serious contender so that we can have a real issues based debate and use our intellect rather than our remote controls to choose a candidate. This isn't American Idol folks, we are choosing the leader of the free world here. The choice better not be based on how good a candidate looks on camera or how eloquently he/she speaks, without regard for the content of what is being said.

Voting for Change? Change from what? A secure country that has kept Al Qaeda in the middle east rather than over here blowing up shopping malls and baseball stadiums? A country that is steadfast in its mission to be the ambassador of freedom and liberty for all people throughout the world? A country that sees evil for what it is and knows from where it originates? A country founded on faith in God Almighty in whatever way He is worshiped? No thanks. I kind of like it the way it is.