24 hours have passed since news was released of Mitt Romney’s endorsement of John McCain for re-election to the United States Senate. Opinions vary as to why this decision was made. Looking at a broader view for America’s future, Romney weighed the potential outcome of the Arizona senatorial election. There were many considerations pro and con, but in the end, Romney chose strength for the United States military and a strong national security. The need for McCain’s gravitas and experienced, respected, powerful influence on national security matters point to Romney’s core belief that keeping Americans safe trumps all.
John McCain press release yesterday:
PHOENIX, AZ – U.S. Senator John McCain’s re-election campaign today announced that former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has endorsed Senator John McCain for re-election to the United States Senate.
Governor Romney today issued the following statement:
“For years, I’ve been an admirer of John McCain. Then we became competitors. Today, I’m proud to call him my friend.
“In my view, it’s hard to imagine the United States Senate without John McCain, especially in the critical times we find ourselves in, with double-digit unemployment, a mountain of debt imperiling future generations and a global terrorist threat from jihadists bent on destroying our very way of life.
“It is times like these that we look to leaders of character. Senator McCain’s record of service and sacrifice for America is honored by all. But I believe that it is his core values of courage, faith and honor – forged in battle and confirmed by a lifetime of service to America – that make Senator McCain’s leadership in the United States Senate so necessary in these perilous times. Not only am I proud to call him a friend, but as an American I am constantly reassured by Senator McCain’s continued involvement in the affairs of our nation, and I am honored to support him.”
“Governor Romney is among the brightest and most dynamic leaders in our Party, and I am proud to have his support,” said Senator John McCain. “I look forward to working with him to advance our shared vision for a stronger, safer and more prosperous America.”
Thoughts on Romney’s endorsement of McCain:
After gracefully exiting the presidential campaign, Romney became a cheerful warrior for McCain. He logged countless hours fundraising for his onetime opponent and appeared on the senator’s behalf almost anywhere the campaign asked, including at the Democratic National Convention. His competence and dedication won him begrudging fans among McCain’s senior staff, who later freely admitted they’d misjudged him. McCain himself was deeply appreciative of Romney’s work, and was won over personally after spending time with Romney and his gracious wife, Ann, at the senator’s Sedona ranch. Romney ended up in serious contention for McCain’s VP slot, and as the financial crisis took over the agenda, he became one of McCain’s valued go-to sources of advice and perspective on economic issues.
So perhaps the news of Romney’s endorsement isn’t all that surprising. It’s good for McCain to have someone with Romney’s financial expertise and centrist appeal come out in his favor. It also helps McCain to appear connected with someone considered part the GOP’s future. The question for Romney, who’s emerging as the GOP’s most serious contender for 2012, is, what’s in it for him? For starters, a friendship with McCain has lots of benefits. McCain is still an excellent drawing card for fundraisers, and although Romney has vast personal wealth, having a name like McCain on board makes a big difference. McCain could also lend a Romney candidacy some foreign-policy and national-security credibility, particularly with Republican voters. Romney lacks it; McCain has it in spades. And McCain has always been popular in New Hampshire, a critical early state.
The move fits nicely with Romney’s apparent strategy. My Gaggle pal Andrew Romano calls it the “adult in the room” approach. Unlike some of his potential opponents, Romney is incredibly strategic about his public appearances. He doesn’t weigh in on every news cycle. He gives selective interviews to drive home messages on the key issues facing the Obama administration: the economy, national security, the auto bailout, and health care. But we don’t see his perfect coif on TV every day, and he’s not racking up a litany of quotes he’ll later wish he never said. Instead, he’s using the George Costanza approach: end on a high note and leave them wanting more. Next week he begins a national tour for his new book, which is touted as a “blueprint for maintaining America’s global leadership.” Advisers say he’ll offer a serious, intellectual analysis of America’s place in the world.
North Star National – Dan Calabrese:
I bet John McCain thought, when he won the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, he was playing the most pivotal role he would ever play in the party. Apparently that was not the case. He now has an even more pivotal role. McCain has become a walking conservative litmus test.
The conservative base at the moment is on a mission to rid the party of so-called RINOs, and McCain is the poster boy for their ire. This is not without some justification. McCain’s past support for free-speech-restricting campaign finance reform, his opposition to the Bush tax cuts and his blocking of a Republican attempt to end Senate filibusters against Bush judicial nominees deserved the criticism they received.
But if you’re a philosophical conservative, and your goal is to get policies enacted that are most crucial to the nation from the conservative point of view, it doesn’t necessarily stand to reason that the best way to do it is to toss out every RINO in a primary and replace him with a so-called “true conservative.”
Relax, ‘true conservatives’: There’s a good case to be made for Romney and Palin (and you) backing McCain:
On national security, McCain has always backed, and proposed during his presidential campaign, the very strategy most conservatives believe Obama has erred by not pursuing. If McCain were president, we would still be putting a missile shield in Eastern Europe. We would be taking a hard line on Iran. We would not be bending over to let the Taliban back into the political process in Afghanistan.
On health care, McCain has been a consistent and effective voice against Obama’s proposals throughout the past year, and his own proposals in 2008 would have moved the nation toward the sort of consumer-directed system we need, not the sort of top-down system we already have, and that Obama would make worse.
- Because of his seniority and standing with the media, McCain can be an effective voice for the conservative positions on the above-mentioned issues. Many conservatives have criticized McCain for making too nice with the media over the years, and not without some justification, but at this particular point in time his having done so can come in very handy. It’s precisely because they do regard him as something other than a blustering partisan that his criticisms of Obama carry weight and get air time.
- J.D. Hayworth shows signs of not being a serious person. His big-spending, earmarking track record, we’ve already covered. His past ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff should give any one concerned about ideological principle serious pause.
Surely there are plenty of reasons for conservatives to be upset with McCain about his past track record. But no election held in 2010 is for the purpose of repeating the past. It’s to put the best people in place to make the best decisions for the nation going forward.
Whatever his faults on other issues, McCain is for the right things on spending, health care and national security. His seniority and bipartisan credibility put him in a good position to advocate effectively for these things. And it just might be that, while Hayworth could make the case that he is the “true conservative,” Palin and Romney recognize the results for the nation – from a conservative point of view – might very well be better if McCain is the guy Arizona sends back to the Senate to get them done.
What good does it do to elect a “true conservative” if he can’t achieve what conservatives think is important?
Evangelicals for Mitt – David French:
The definition of “RINO” is not “any politician who deviates in any material respect from conservative principles.” A RINO is someone who deviates in virtually every material respect. In fact, when it comes to national security, most social issues, most economic issues, judges, and many other areas, McCain is one of us. I’m not sure that our goal as a conservative community is to simply support the most conservative candidate in any given primary. There’s a lot more to effective leadership than ideology, and such a mindset encourages the rather unpleasant ideological puritans in our midst.
(emphasis mine)
Mitt Romney 2012
3-8-10 UPDATE by Ross:
59,934,814 people voted for McCain in 2008… We’re gonna need them all plus some in 2012. It’s all about keep a big tent!
I’m past the initial shock of the endorsement and have begun to take in the calculation. I’m ok with it now. I can’t stand Mccain but I am seeing the light on why supporting him is better than the alternative.
this is very very disappointing to me. McCain was downright nasty to Mitt in the Primaries for Presidency. AND – he will not win AZ, the people here are fed up with him…he is NOT a conservative and this state is NOT Mass. ANYTIME his name is next to legislation with Kennedy, Feinstien and so forth is SHOWS he is not a conservative…stick to your guns and go with conservatism…not the I scratch your back you scratch mine type of politics that has America up in arms. Leave McCain and back Hayworth.
I keep hearing the argument for the Romney endorsement, and I just can’t buy it. My biggest issue with McCain is that he seems to have made a name for himself by kicking dirt on the shoes of his friends (i.e. Republicans), and bending over backwards to accommodate his political enemies (i.e. Democrats). His “gang of 14″ interlude helped Democrats stonewall the confirmation of decent jurists to the bench. What about immigration?
There is no question McCain is great on the military and on spending, but does anyone believe JD Hayworth wouldn’t be? I am not so much pro Hayworth as I am anti McCain for all the reasons above and many more that could be cited. McCain helped the Dems thwart the Republican agenda. Can anyone deny that? Really??
Mitt’s endorsement seems more about ingratiating himself with the Republican establishment than purely a matter of conscience. Just when Republicans seem ready to present a politically popular and potent message (e.g. conservatism), you have this odd endorsement by Romney for McCain. While Sarah Palin campaigning for McCain is understandable, this is not. McCain and Huckabee conspired to sink Romney’s presidential run – a run that I fully supported. McCain is at best a fair-weather friend to Republicans, and were Mitt to mount a successful run, he may come to regret having McCain as the Republican scold, friend of Democrats gumming up the works in the Senate.
His endorsement definitely makes it unlikely that I will support him in the future. While I could get past the questionable things he did as governor of Massachusetts, this pretty much seals it for me with him. We need to start doing things to get people excited, rather than the “hold-your-nose-and-support-the-establishment-nominee” mantra we get. We tried it with the disastrous McCain campaign, and aside from bringing Sarah Palin to national attention, left the party rudderless and bland.
Like many others, we, as Mitt supporters, had an initial response to the endorsement of McCain as “Oh, no, he did not do that, did he?” I guess our first question was, “why did he feel it was necessary to give the endorsement, at all?” Was he asked by McCain to give it?
The temptation is to back JD Hayworth, but further consideration needs to include those questionable actions by him that could be used against him by his Democratic opponent. We DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THE SEAT. McCain is a know quantity, however we may consider many of his actions to be directly opposed to our conservative principals and values. We must not isolate ourselves to the point that we destroy ourselves. In these serious and threatening times, creating a balance to thwart destruction is an ACHIEVABLE goal. We must demonstrate patience and courage and the confidence to follow through in holding our elected officials feet to the fire.
Mitt Romney is a gift to this country that we must protect, defend and support. His knowledge, experience and moral strength, surrounded by well chosen advisors WILL SAVE America. We MUST resist the temptation to divide our loyalties based on the absence of perfection. We MUST maintain a cohesiveness that leads to success or we will surely fail. We MUST trust Mitt IF we support him. There may be times when his choices seem ill advised TO US but are made for a good reason based on his experience and exposure to the political aspects of those choices. As supporters, we make a choice to support or not but there must be a choice made that cannot be affected by individual aspects of the campaign that we may not understand. We MUST trust him and support him or walk away with another candidate. Wavering back and forth based on individual issues is a foundation built on very shaky ground and threatens his success in 2012. So, I guess our position is this: We trust and support Mitt Romney based on his life and his actions. We are committed 100% to working for his success in 2012 – we have a 50% chance that our decision will be a good one. If we succeed and he does not perform as promised then “that is life – take the good with the bad” and we will speak out with our objections and stand up for that in which we believe. But, if it turns out that we have chosen wisely with America and Americans the beneficiaries of his leadership, then this time and our effort will forever reinforce the importance of making a decision and sticking with it to the end. We hope that all of Mitt’s supporters will step back from this incident and trust that Mitt made this choice, as he does so many of his choices, because he was convinced that it was THE RIGHT DECISION FOR AMERICA.
We in this party, need to understand that the elephant suit is not a ‘one size fits all’. McCain, while not my fav, and at times I doubt his judgement, has the core values that is important. Strong military, fiscal responsibility, etc. We need to get past who is a a ‘true’ conservative, and who is not. If McCAin can give me 80 percent, I’m fine with it. I’ll never get 100 percent. I like JD – a lot. But I also don’t think he can win against the democrat. If we continue down the path that some want to take us, NY23 won’t be an anomaly, but the norm when it comes to GOP races.
@Tom DePew
Mr. DePew:
Your response to the McCain endorsement is understandable. Hopefully, you will take to heart the responses made here and reconsider your support of Mitt. So many hard working Americans are upset and frustrated by current events. We want results consistent with our principals and values. From our perspective, solutions seem simple. However, many and varied domestic and international situations unknown to us influence decision making and leadership. That must be factored into our level of patience and understanding. Right now, we are impatient for common sense actions that keep America strong and great. We believe Mitt has the ability to come through, as Ronald Reagan did, by acting from a position of strength, especially when it is necessary to deal with the other side of the aisle. As we read the daily journaling of Reagan, it is clear that he had to bend in many situations from his preferred course of action. But the outcome in virtually all cases was in the best interests of America.
Ms. Copely:
Thank you for your thoughtful responses. Clearly you like Mr. Romney, and I find several things attractive with him, particularly his business acumen, which in this disastrous economic environment is pretty critical.
I’m not a single-issue voter, nor do I subscribe to particular litmus tests. I would have supported Rudy Guilliani even though he is pro-choice and I am pro-life. The reason I would have done that is because Rudy was upfront about his position, and he promised that he would appoint judges who would refer to original intent and not legislate from the bench.
If you look at the choices Mr. Romney had, he could have endorsed JD, not said anything, or come out in support. Recall that I indicated I was able to get past Massachusetts care and some of the things that he said there to get elected. I was warming to him in the last election cycle before the McCain/Huckabee alliance that pushed Romney out. He bowed out very gracefully, and he has been saying a lot of good things. Even though his record does not bear out his rhetoric, I thought his previous explanations made sense and I had gotten past it.
We had an example of the Republican establishment supporting people like McCain, and they have been disastrous for the party. Specter in Pennsylvania was a Republican for many years, and was constantly being bought off so he would support legislation within the Republican agenda. Ditto for Susan Collins and Olympia Snow. Through Grassley in there as well. I get that they’re more Republican than Democrat, but the frustrating thing is that principles that Americans by and large support have to be watered down so we can get people like McCain on board.
Colin Powell supported McCain and was a big buddy right up to the point that it would hurt politically, and he endorsed Obama. McCain heaped criticism on his supporters, but didn’t find the same fire in the belly when it came to criticizing Obama. Independent campaign expenditures were not a problem for McCain until it started to hurt the Democrats (John Kerry and the swift boat vets).
I’m starting to rant a bit here – sorry about that. By endorsing McCain, Romney has hitched his wagon to that failed presidential candidate. The argument to endorse McCain or elect the Democrat could be applied to any race at any time. Hayworth may not be the right guy, but the fear of maybe losing if we get rid of the incumbent basically means that we have to put up with McCain torpedoing conservative initiatives for another six years. I don’t think anyone here wants that.
I will think it through carefully, since clearly I have a strong emotional reaction to the disaster that is John McCain. Romney would burnish his outsider credentials if he weren’t playing this inside baseball kind of game.
By the way, I would support Romney should he become the nominee, since another 4 years of Obama is unthinkable. However, unless Romney gets people excited about his candidacy, he will end up with a lackluster campaign ala McCain. In rebuilding the Republican party, we need to “raise a banner of bold colors, not pale pastels…”
My biggest concern with McCain is is blatant support – and sponsorship – of Amnesty for illegal aliens. This, alone, makes him a RINO in my book. For Romney to endorse McCain is a slap in the face of those of us who think that this is a REAL problem. There are other issues, as well, but this is enough for me.