22 April 2008 - 8:36A Minority Report

In the March 2008 printed edition of this publication, the staff offered its endorsement in the Presidential race to Arizona Senator John S. McCain III. The Managing Editor notes that this endorsement was not unanimous, and while he does not disagree with the decision, he hereby exercises his right of reply with the following comments.

Unconvinced: A Commentary on John McCain.

One of the unfortunate consequences of being human is that despite all of our best efforts, and despite our attempts to construct institutions that attempt to produce the best possible solutions and policies to represent our interests, it is all too possible and all too common that we make mistakes. The sanctimonious defenders of democracy tell us that in party primaries, the “people make the right choices”, and that “the people must stand by the people their party nominates”. Perhaps I am too much of a capitalist, but the fallibility which makes us human combined with the need for a truly open marketplace of ideas in politics suggest that neither platitude has any basis in reality. Just as doctors with years of experience in medicine school can foul up basic medical procedures, so can members of political parties fail to nominate adequate candidates to represent them. When such mistakes occur, members of parties should not feel compelled to support these inadequate candidates out of a contrived sense of duty or loyalty. That duty and loyalty to party is far better invested in working internally of the party to make sure such mistakes are not repeated.

But enough of the abstraction and on to the central thesis of these comments. I’ve called myself a Republican for longer than some would care to know. I still consider myself a loyal member of the GOP despite eight rather disappointing years under the leadership of a President who would fit in frighteningly well with the Christian Democrat parties of Latin America. But when it comes to the 2008 Republican Presidential race, there is no sense crying over spilled milk when it comes to who my party’s nominee will be [In the interest of full disclosure, I remain a Ron Paul supporter]. After years of enjoying a self-styled perception of the “Republican maverick in the Senate”, John Sidney McCain III is the Republican nominee for President this year. The stats do not lie when considering the question of who gave McCain the nomination. In a field crowded with candidates vying for the title of “the true conservative” (whatever that means in a post G.W. Bush era), McCain earned the grudging trust of self-declared conservative Republicans, in addition to more moderate voters who vote in open primary states. The nomination is his, and it is now time for Republicans to determine if he is deserving of the Oval Office.

The fact that his Democratic opponent in November will be far less palatable to rank-and-file Republicans than McCain should not hide the fact that we Republicans royally screwed up this primary. The fact that Hillary or Obama could be our only alternative to McCain in the general election should not blind Republicans to the reality that we simply picked the wrong nominee for our party. At one point in this race, eleven men were running for our nomination. Of those running, McCain might have been more qualified to be our nominee than four of them…at most [Brownback, Gilmore, Hunter, Tancredo]. McCain’s almost-nauseating resilience compounded by the media’s veritable love affair with him, allowed him to overcome staffing snafus, money woes and being demonstrably misinformed on a variety of critical issues to take our party’s nomination. Now that we are stuck with McCain for the forseeable future (and if his mother is any indication, possibly the next eight years), it is time to not only weigh our priorities in 2008, but also to do what is necessary to reform the Republican nominating schema to reduce our chances of screwing up in the future.

Make no mistake about this, folks. For all of McCain’s many faults, and for all of his irksome positions on the environment, taxes and internationalism, and despite his growing senility, is far more palatable a choice for conservatives than anybody the Democrats nominate this election. Furthermore, any Democratic nominee will present a serious contrast to McCain on major issues that will define the future or our country. The Constitution may nominate Alan Keyes, and the Libertarian Party may nominate former Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia, but other than fine oratory and a hypnotic porn star mustache respectively, neither offer much in the way of reasonable alternatives to a Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton Administration other than a smug sense of ideological purity for those conservatives who might support them. While I certainly can empathize with the desire and to be forthright am considering supporting Barr in November still, all do so at their own peril, considering the risks of a Clinton or Obama Presidency becoming a reality.

However, on the matter of this publication’s endorsement of Senator McCain, I cannot join with my colleagues or my Editor in Chief. This should not be construed to imply that I would not or will not vote for Senator McCain come Election Day. But would I in fact cast my ballot for him, it would not be an endorsement of his candidacy, but rather a statement of opposition to that of the Democratic nominee. But on account of the failure of the nomination regime of my party to ensure the best candidate earned the nomination of actual party membership, combined with McCain’s casual understanding of party loyalty, I cannot and will not endorse him for President.

After 2008, the Republican National Committee must resolve several critical flaws in their rules for delegate nominations by the state Republican parties. First and foremost, they ought to amend their nomination rules to only accept delegates chosen from completely closed primaries. Caucuses have proven to be detrimental to ensuring party members their right to participate in their own party’s work, and open primaries have for far too long been notorious for independent voters pooling together to “game the system” and undermine political parties (see the 1950 Wisconsin Senate Republican Primary and the 1988 Michigan Democratic Presidential Primary as prime examples). Second, the GOP must impose strict proportional representation requirements for these primaries. In Florida, John McCain won all 57 of the states GOP convention delegates while winning just 36% of the vote. Putting an end to winner take all primaries will allow for a more deliberative nomination process without opening the door for the slugfest we see in the DNC over superdelegates and other such nonsense.

We must learn from our mistakes in the future, but until we can put those lessons to use, we have to live with our mistakes. John McCain is today’s mistake for the Republican Party and its members. The question now is whether the bigger mistake was for us to nominate Senator McCain or to allow a far less desirable person to become President out of bitterness. No party member should feel compelled to support Senator McCain, but every party member should be able to figure out which is the more grievous error.

I dissent.