Advertisement
Jewcy Book Club
Welcome Authors
Benyamin Cohen
& Matthew Rothschild
who are posting all week.
Coming up:
- 12/08: Seth Greenland
 |
It's Too Early To Celebrate A McCain Victory |
|
 by Daniel Koffler, March 24, 2008 |
||
It's been a tough month for Democrats, ever since Hillary Clinton won the primaries in Ohio and Texas and extended the primary campaign seemingly interminably. The main beneficiary of the increasingly bitter internecine fight on the Democratic side has been John McCain, who now enjoys his highest favorability rating in eight years, and has drawn even or slightly ahead of both Democratic candidates in hypothetical matchups after trailing them for most of the year.
Still, it's absurdly premature for Republicans to start popping champagne bottles. The
Ulster Unionism: Surprisingly unpopular among Irish Catholics Democratic primary race will end at some point. And when it does, McCain will be at a massive financial and structural disadvantage to his opponent, whoever he or she might be. Nonetheless, there's an irrational exuberance creeping into the McCain camp, of which Exhibit A has got to be Jamie Kirchick's post at The Plank speculating about a McCain victory in the Bay State. You see, a Rasmussen poll several days ago had Barack Obama ahead of John McCain by just seven points in Massachusetts. Sure, it's only one poll, and Mass is among the most liberal states in the country, the only one to vote for George McGovern. But Jamie is willing to offer an even money bet that McCain can carry the home state of the Kennedy clan, because, Jamie says, McCain has a secret weapon:
[A] Scots-Irish war veteran as the Republican nominee complicates predictions about whom Kennedy Country will support come November.
Well now that Hillary Clinton has brought peace to Northern Ireland, I'm as optimistic as anyone about the prospects for comity between Irish Catholics and Protestants. But playing up his heritage is probably not a winning strategy for McCain in Massachusetts. "Irish" in America used to mean the Ulster Scots --- Protestant Anglo-Scottish settlers in Ireland who helped the crown keep the Catholics in line. Then Irish Catholics began emigrating in large numbers, and the original American Irish needed a way of distinguishing themselves from the dirty papists, so "Scots-Irish" it was. They used to wear orange on St. Patrick's Day as a provocation. Today, in a place like Massachusetts, "Scots-Irish" is a toned down way of saying "Son of Armagh and the Orange Cross," and would go over about as well at pubs where the regulars used to pass around a collection plate for the IRA. Call me crazy, but I have a hunch that Three Cheers for Ulster! and A Protestant Nation for a Protestant People! and We'll guard old Derry's walls! and Ulster Will Fight and Ulster Will Be Right! won't be the most successful slogans in Kennedy Country. What's more, Obama can pick as his running mate another Scots-Irish war veteran, Sen. James Webb of Virginia, in which case the two campaigns may be locked in a serious contest for the Paisleyite vote that has always been so crucial in Massachusetts.
On the other hand, McCain does have a leg up in south Boston if he has to run against a dahkie, but that's another story.
How to do the low-carb holiday in a post-Heston world
Too many Americans caricature my community
A call for a new ethnic consciousness
A week, a blogroll, and a deadly duel
When a prodigal daughter returns, she lets her clothes do the ...
| Dev Blog | Privacy | FAQ | Contact | |  | | Comment Policy | About Us | Submissions |
| Hosting provided by Tilted Planet | ||
Mateo
How has Hillary "extended the primary campaign interminably" if the "primary race will end at some point"? We have primaries for a reason. Let 'em run.
Anyway, it's disingenuous to characterize the prognostications of a staffer at the left-center New Republic as representative (much less "Exhibit A") of the feelings of the"McCain camp" - much less its supposed "irrational exuberance." (Why don't you find a post/quote/article/essay/theory/napkin that actually comes from the "McCain camp"?)
The truth is, McCain generally has kept away from the dirty business of speculating on the Democratic primary - much less discussed how he benefits from the present turmoil.
Also - kudos for not mentioning Rev. Wright...though it's safe to say that he's at least as responsible as Hillary and McCain for the current downward slope of Obama's poll numbers...
Daniel Koffler
Anyway, it's disingenuous to characterize the prognostications of a staffer at the left-center New Republic as representative (much less "Exhibit A") of the feelings of the"McCain camp"
Jamie's a friend of mine. TNR may be center-left. Jamie is center-right, and his politics align with McCain's very closely. Here's his endorsement of McCain in the Advocate. By "McCain camp," I mean people in McCain's camp, not just his campaign.
Also - kudos for not mentioning Rev. Wright...though it's safe to say that he's at least as responsible as Hillary and McCain for the current downward slope of Obama's poll numbers...
Clinton and Obama's numbers have both fallen relative to McCain, and by similar numbers. The difference between now and a month ago is that Obama has seen a ~15 point negative swing among independents, Clinton ~10 points. Rev. Wright doesn't explain that. Looks likes it's time for a new hypothesis, huh?
Good catch on "interminably," though.
Ismail
"On the other hand, McCain does have a leg up in the south side of Boston..."
Chicago may have a south side, but Boston doesn't. It has a South End (former welfare hotels and crack houses, now a gay/yuppie redoubt of culinary trendiness and cultural preciosity, awash in lattes and labradoodles) and it has South Boston (this is the one you meant-once home only to Tough Micks, territorial white harpies and the sentimental boyos of Boston politics, now rapidly gentrifying as newly minted lawyers and the people that count as artists in Boston infest the place).
But there is no south side of Boston. None.
Mateo
Jamie's a friend of mine. TNR may be center-left. Jamie is center-right, and his politics align with McCain's very closely.
Cool. I'm not a regular reader of TNR, and I certainly don't know the guy personally, but I didn't find anything at TNR.com that mentioned Jamie's political allegiance. (I didn't see the piece in the Advocate; thanks for the link.) Fwiw, the TNR post you linked to reads like a warning, to fellow Democrats, from a Hillary supporter. (I.e., it doesn't read like a McCain-camper licking his chops with exuberance.)
Clinton and Obama's numbers have both fallen relative to McCain, and by
similar numbers. The difference between now and a month ago is that
Obama has seen a ~15 point negative swing among independents, Clinton
~10 points. Rev. Wright doesn't explain that. Looks likes it's time for
a new hypothesis, huh?
Well, if we're going to have fun with statistics, I'd quibble with the idea that falling 15pts is similar to falling 10pts. Beyond that, I'm not sure what you're getting at about the need for a "new hypothesis." That Rev. Wright has had a negative effect on Obama's candidacy really isn't in dispute. I didn't have much of a hypothesis to begin with - only that Wright has been more damaging to Obama's campaign than Hillary and McCain have. The fact that Hillary's polling relative to McCain is also crappy has no bearing on that claim.
Daniel Koffler
That Rev. Wright has had a negative effect on Obama's candidacy really isn't in dispute.
No argument.
Andy Hume
You're entirely correct, Daniel. One additional observation: the title of McCain's "No Surrender" tour is, I suspect, no coincidence either. It certainly has a double meaning that would be clear to anyone in Ireland, as this mural demonstrates.
It also forms part of the chorus of the song "Derry's Walls" that you reference above.
Anonymous
Other things that won't play well in the (former?) Southie:
African-American presidential candidates. African-American anything, for that matter. Busing riots, anyone?
Daniel Koffler
Hence the last line of the post.
Yaakov
"Hillary Clinton won the primaries in Ohio and Texas and extended the primary campaign seemingly interminably"
It seems interminable this year only because the primaries (at least the money primaries reported in the papers) started so early. I worked on the Bush campaign in 1980 and I recall the April 1980 Pennsylvania primary. Although it looked like the lost cause that it was, Bush still campaigned hard, won Pennsylvania, and continued to fight on. This quote from the April 23, 1980 NYTimes sums it up:
"HOUSTON, April 23--George Bush, his cliff-hanging campaign for the Republican Presidential nomination pulled back from the brink once more by yesterday's victory in Pennsylvania, relaxed at his home here today and savored the taste of even monentary triumph"
There was one difference between 1980 and 2008: Check out how many negative ads Reagan ran against Bush in 1980. Any one want to bet on the number?
Melvin Schnell
McCain doesnt need Massachusetts, New York, or California to win. If he wins the rest, he wins the presidency. The polls dont reflect what the average American will do when having to choose between a radical liberal (Obama-Wright), a liar (Clinton-Bosnia), or someone who understands war (McCain-POW)
Jon
Marvin,
I hope you're right. We've had elections before between an older man with war experience (Dole) and a younger liar (Bill Clinton) and not fared well. On the other hand, I think almost any student of politics would agree that McCain is a much better candiate than Dole and Hilary a much worse candidate than Bill at his prime.
Jon
UlsterProtestant
Why have you got a picture of the "Orange cross" magazine which was a pamphlet published during the 70's to raise money for UVF prisoners as a picture about Unionism? the UVF is Loyalist not necciariously Unionist in fact they are more communionist than anything.
tellner
And thank the Good Lord for that