Christine Todd Whitman blames social conservatives for John McCain's loss.
I call bullshit.
McCain didn't lose because of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin actually made McCain's loss less of a landslide because she energized the base and caused them to come out and vote in an election when they otherwise would have stayed home.
McCain lost for two reasons, and neither can be blamed on social conservatives.
1. He ran a horrible campaign--John McCain couldn't focus on a single message for his campaign. First he was the war hero whose experience had made him right on national security issues even against his own party. Then he was for energy independence (although not drilling in ANWR, which made no sense). Then he was going to swoop in and save Wall Street. Then he was not the guy who hung out with Bill Ayers. Then he was Joe the Plumber. Because McCain barred the use of the poisonous Jeremiah Wright early in the campaign, it was difficult for him to argue why Obama--who is the most unqualified person to ever reach the presidency--was too big a risk for America.
2. Bush fatigue--It is very rare for a party to hold the presidency after eight years. Americans are fickle things, wanting change no matter what. The unpopularity of George W. Bush hurt McCain and Republicans in general. Couple that with the "making history" aspect of electing Barack Obama and there was virtually no way for John McCain to win.
Whitman's argument that the Republicans need to save the party by becoming Democrat Lite is absurd and impossible. Social conservatives tolerate people like Whitman because it helps them elect candidates who take their concerns seriously. Jettisoning the single most reliable group of Republican voters would be suicide.
Matt Lewis notes,
In my estimation, the argument over whether or not the GOP should be a fiscally conservative party -- or a socially conservative party -- or anything else -- is a false choice. We might argue over which positions to stress during a given election season, but abandoning any wing of the conservative movement would be a disaster for the GOP.
This may not be the time in history to emphasize conservative social values, but it's simply foolish to talk about abandoning them.
|