Slate's Bizbox
pundit central:

High Noon in the GOP

Michael Brus
Posted Monday, Feb. 21, 2000, at 3:17 AM ET

Issue 1 is George W. Bush's big win in the South Carolina primary.

It's a black weekend for John McCain. Every pundit show trots out the decisive numbers from Saturday's primary: Not only did Bush beat McCain by over 10 points, but he won nearly 2-1 among Christian conservatives, Republicans, and pro-lifers. He also won among women and youth, and even won half the veterans' vote. A few talking heads, such as George Stephanopoulos (ABC's This Week), point out that McCain won a majority of GOP voters excluding the Christian right. But Stephanopoulos' colleague, George F. Will, notes that for a Republican to win the presidency he must win the South, and winning the South requires winning the evangelical vote, which McCain clearly cannot do.

Many pundits--such as Brit Hume (Fox News Sunday) and George F. Will--berate McCain for his bitter, defiant concession speech Saturday night. (Will calls it a "tantrum.") As if to burnish this abrasive image, John McCain tells Tim Russert (NBC's Meet the Press) that Bush has been lying like--that's right--Bill Clinton. But several pundits--such as Steve Roberts (CNN's Late Edition), Mark Shields (CNN's Capital Gang), Bill Kristol (CBS's Face the Nation), and Tucker Carlson (LE)--rise to McCain's defense, calling Bush's South Carolina campaign dirty and "cutthroat conservative" rather than "compassionate conservative" (Kristol). At any rate, notes Eleanor Clift (The McLaughlin Group), the conventional wisdom about primaries has been reversed: Just last week pundits were pronouncing the death of negative ads, state political machines, and the Christian right. Now they are the three pillars of Bush's political resuscitation.

The day before the primary, Paul Gigot and Mark Shields (both of PBS's NewsHour With Jim Lehrer) argued that South Carolina was a must-win for Bush but not for McCain. But now that Bush has revived his campaign and McCain has lost, nearly everyone agrees that McCain is toast if he doesn't win Michigan on Tuesday. ("We're in sudden-death overtime, and I think that McCain has no illusions about it," says Carlson.) What are the senator's chances? Karen Tumulty (FNS) calls Michigan a "mirror image" of South Carolina, with few evangelicals and lots of Catholics (who may be offended by Bush's visit to the anti-Catholic Bob Jones University). But Al Hunt (CG) points out that Gov. John Engler is Catholic, pro-life, very popular--and a Bush ally.

In the long term, several pundits see peril for Bush. Susan Page and Tucker Carlson (both LE) note that the governor will have trouble veering back to the center for the general election. Brit Hume, Juan Williams, and Karen Tumulty (each of FNS) argue that his large tax-cut proposal won't play well in the general election.


A Tale of Two Questions

The media may be guilty of swooning for John McCain, but Tim Russert is not among the idolators. Exhibit A is Russert's hour-long grilling of McCain on Sunday--an interrogation that was just as hard-hitting as his hourlong interrogation of Bush last week. Russert asked several identical questions of each candidate. Comparing the candidate's answers to two of these is instructive. One of these identical questions concerns gays in the military. How, Russert asks, will the U.S. and our European allies perform joint military exercises now that all of our allies allow homosexual soldiers to serve openly? Wouldn't any joint operations undermine the "unit cohesion" of American forces? Here is Bush's brush-off:

Interesting angle. I haven't thought of that. That's a very interesting way to look at it. I'm not changing my position, though. I support what Colin Powell put in place. What's best for America is what I'm thinking about. What's best for morale and our troops. We can figure out how to deal with joint exercises if we ever have any. But what's best for the American military is that policy which was developed by generals like Colin Powell, of "Don't ask, don't tell." I adhere to the policy. It's an important policy and it needs to stay in place.

This is classic Dubya. His idea of an effective response is to zero in on the questioner's tactics (hey, you're trying to get me to change my position!) and then to profess his own moral virtue (because I have our troops' best interests at heart, my position cannot possibly be wrong). Conversely, this question plays to McCain's strengths--in this case, an intricate knowledge of the military command structure and a willingness to listen to advice from people he trusts:

[No, b]ecause [the allied countries] don't totally integrate their armed forces. And I don't want the United States military to be anything like any of those [nation's militaries]--even the Israeli military. We have the best military in the world, that's why they call on us at every turn. And when people like Gen. Colin Powell and Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf and many other military people I respect--including the NCOs--tell me that they can [change the policy and also] maintain unit cohesion, I would be glad to review the policy.

But Russert asked another identical question both weeks: What's your take on the new Russian president, Vladimir Putin? This elicited a thoughtful, conciliatory response from Bush:

Too early to tell on [Putin]. First of all, he hasn't ever been elected. He was--you know, he succeeded Yeltsin, really appointed to the temporary president. My hope with Vladimir Putin is two things. One, that we can work with him in the post-Cold War era to bring some security in to Europe. We need to work with him to continue to dismantle strategic and tactical nuclear warheads. That's the old Nunn-Lugar bill that's been around for awhile. It's a good program, where scientists from both sides of the ocean come together to help bring some security into the region. We need to work with Putin--if he is the president, if he's elected--to change the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

But when Russert posed the same question to McCain, it brought out the senator's jingoism:

[Putin is a] ruthless, ex-Communist apparatchik that is probably going to tell the Russian people that he wants to make the trains run on time, and I'm telling you this is a serious situation, because I think the Russian people may turn to more and more of a dictatorial government because of the incredible economic woes they face. And us letting Mr. Putin get away literally unscathed with this brutality that's taking place in Chechnya has a lot of implications for the future.

Staying on Message

I talked [to South Carolinians] about my record in the state of Texas, that I was a reformer with results. ... The people heard it loud and clear. And I'm honored and humbled by the support. ... It's hard to get as huge a turnout as we got without running a positive campaign, and I stand by the campaign I ran. ...We got a big, big youth vote because the youth heard somebody who is optimistic about the future. The youth heard somebody who has got a positive agenda. And, you know, I've heard all this kind of punditry about ads, but our ads--I stand by our ads. ... [Voters] want somebody who's got a record of leadership. And I'm a conservative, but I also have got a brand of conservatism called compassionate conservatism that people all throughout our party can relate to. And I've got the results to show it.

--George W. Bush (FTN)

I'm humbled by the outpouring of support here in South Carolina. ... I won because I was a reformer with results. ... A lot of young people came out to the polls today and supported me in big numbers. And they did so because I'm an optimistic person and they heard that optimistic message. ... That's one of the ingredients that happened here in South Carolina, is [voters want] somebody to lead. And the people of this state, of South Carolina, sent a strong message to the rest of America that George W. is a leader.

--George W. Bush (FNS)

My message was one of compassionate conservatism. ... I am in fact a reformer who's had positive results when given the chance to lead. ... If you look at the exit polls, I ran the positive campaign according to the voters who actually made the decision. I know that some punditry are talking about [negative ads], but the people who actually turned up at the polls said they appreciated my campaign. And it was a positive campaign, and I stand by the campaign I ran. ... I'm really proud of it, we ran a great campaign. ... I'm really pleased with the organization and the thousands of South Carolinians that worked on my behalf, and I'm very gracious and humbled.

--George W. Bush (TW)

Well, Wolf, I'm honored, and thanks. I'm humbled by the outpouring of support. ... Well, first of all, I won because my message of compassionate conservatism took hold here. People heard the message. Secondly, I explained to people clearly that I was a reformer who had gotten positive results in my state of Texas. ... I was able to connect with the voters here with a message that's very hopeful and positive, and [with] a reform agenda. ... When you look at the exit polls, Wolf, the people said that Gov. Bush ran the positive campaign here in South Carolina, and I'm proud of my campaign. ... They responded overwhelmingly for me because I ran a positive campaign. ... I stand by the campaign I ran and I'm proud of the campaign I ran. ... The reason the vote was so big is because people were excited about my message and were positive about my message. ... As a matter of fact, the reason people voted for me is because I'm optimistic, I'm a hopeful person. ... I'm going to continue running the kind of campaign I ran, which is positive and optimistic, with an agenda that people can hear. And it paid off here in South Carolina.

--George W. Bush (LE)


Last Word (Infinite Loop Version)

I've had a few hard knocks in my life, crashed a few airplanes, spent some time in a hotel where they don't leave mints on the pillow, and been taking on the special interests in Washington.

--John McCain (MTP)

Look, I've crashed a few airplanes in my time, I spent some time in a hotel where they don't put mints on the pillow. And I've been fighting the special interests and the iron triangle in Washington.

--John McCain (LE)

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Michael Brus, a former Slate assistant editor, is a writer and social worker in Seattle.
Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Imagine if...
Hiatt | What if McCain had waged his campaign based on respect?
Editorial: Meddlesome PalinKing: The Danger of Palin Power