Sanford’s second-half support for McCain
posted at 7:37 am on March 16, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Pundits have often included Governor Mark Sanford on their short list for VP choices, but until now, Sanford hasn’t even bothered to endorse any Republican candidate. Yesterday, Sanford endorsed John McCain, and wrote in the Wall Street Journal that his fellow conservatives needed to come off the bench and get into the second half of the ballgame:
I sat out the first half, not endorsing a candidate, occupied with my day job and four young boys at home. But I’m now stepping onto the field and going to work to help John McCain. It’s important that conservatives do the same.
It’s easy to get caught up in the pursuit of political perfection, and to assume that if a candidate doesn’t agree with you 100% of the time, then he doesn’t deserve your support. In fact, Mr. McCain is a lot closer to 100% than many conservatives realize. He has never voted for a tax increase in his 25 years in Congress. He holds an 83% lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union. He is listed as a taxpayer hero by Citizens Against Government Waste. And he is supported by noted conservatives Phil Gramm, Jack Kemp and others.
The process of iron sharpening iron is good for the GOP. But now, I believe, the time has passed for focusing on what divides us.
It would be easy to pass this off as Sanford’s attempt to make the case for himself as VP, but anyone who has followed Sanford’s career knows that he doesn’t do much pandering. He bucked his own party to fight pork in his own state. Sanford gained notoriety by embarrassing Republicans and Democrats in the legislature by arriving with piglets under each arm after they attempted to overrule him on spending limits. He doesn’t exactly fit the mold of a party-above-all pol.
That makes his argument here more compelling that if it had come from most other Republicans. Sanford would normally be the first in line to argue conservatism over Republicanism, but the options leave little room for principled apathy. Under a Barack Obama presidency, spending would go up $800 billion dollars, and taxes would increase in many different income categories and levels. Hillary proposes about the same amount in spending increases but refuses to say where she’ll find the money.
John McCain hasn’t used the campaign trail to offer hundreds of billions in expansion of the federal government. He has fought tax hikes his entire career and earmarked zero dollars in twenty years. Sanford explains that the federal government will start facing massive economic crises in the next five to ten years if we don’t elect a President willing to end that expansion and force Congress to plan responsibly for the future. If conservatives think that waiting out a Democratic debacle will make it easier to elect a more conservative candidate later, Sanford argues that time will have run out and the next President will get left holding the bag no matter which party holds the White House.
Sanford’s endorsement should serve as a wake-up call to conservatives across the nation. The general election will present a choice for the nation — whether we should continue expanding federal entitlements when our current obligations will go unmet, or whether we will have responsible leadership enforcing some long-overdue discipline instead. Obama and Clinton offer the same old tax-and-spend policies that have brought us to the brink of ruin, as well as the same old pork-barrel mentality. John McCain is the candidate that actually represents change in 2008.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Actual Exit Question:
Why is this man not President already?
BKennedy on March 16, 2008 at 7:44 AM
Gee..can we not have just a couple of days off to enjoy the Cinton and Obama fratricide before thinking about a VP ? Sanford seems pretty clean at this point. Far less of a target than Romney or some of the other headliners. His presence either on the ticket or as a visible and active supporter could help calm the nerves of some of us who may still feel that we could flip a coin between Billary and McCain. But of course it tees him up for 2012 or 2016. Not sure how that will work with others who slugged it out this time and are still looking down the road for a shot. It will be interesting as usual.
JonRoss on March 16, 2008 at 8:12 AM
McCain is actually the only man left standing who can save the economy – in spite of his modesty, his fiscal policies are those of economic strongmen. Now is not the time to engage in a massive tax-and-spend programme to fund socialised income support and healthcare. The Democratic proposals would be disasterous. We need to boost our recovery by reducing federal spending, increasing trade, and easing the financial burden on citizens.
Sanford gives an excellent response to the pseuds who still spit bile at our democratically chosen nominee – the damage to the economy will already be severe by the next term. No economic conservative stands by to watch that happen to our nation.
Indeed. Events of the past two weeks have made that abundently clear.
Pax americana on March 16, 2008 at 8:39 AM
True enough, now is the time to get behind our guy and win. Now if I can just get myself to stop calling him McVain.
conservnut on March 16, 2008 at 8:55 AM
Talk about putting lipstick on a pig. He is going to shaft conservatism and therefore America. Fortunately, we will not have to witness the debacle as he will lose in a landslide.
Valiant on March 16, 2008 at 9:10 AM
MexicCain needs to make some serious concessions to us conservatives before I’ll be duped into voting for him.
HYTEAndy on March 16, 2008 at 9:35 AM
Ditto. Sanford is disingenuous in the extreme. “….never voted for a tax increase…” is simply trying to insult the simple. He voted against two celebrated tax cuts by his own president, so don’t try to say he is not pandering by characterizing this guy as a conservative.
It is insulting to pass off what this guy is going to do, when there are volumes of what he has done.
Getting conservative religion once you are prime time is hardly a confidence builder. Sanford would be better to admit John’s deficiencies and then segue to “iron sharpening iron” and we have a lot of “sharpening” to go. Instead, we get a denial of pandering. Please.
Starlink on March 16, 2008 at 9:43 AM
Let’s analayze that, shall we?
And on the most important tax cuts of this century, the Bush tax cuts, he voted against them. Twice. Not to mention he wants to tax us on carbon emissions and raise gas prices, all to satisfy his global warming kool-aid thirst.
Misleading. His ACU ratings have gone from good to bad over his tenure, earning him a 65 in the last rating.
Any significant legislation against entitlements? Pork, though wrong, is child’s play compared to entitlements.
Because Dole/Kemp was a real winner, right?
And let’s not get started on immigration…
——–
As I said above, MexicCain needs to make some serious concessions to us conservatives before we vote for him. If we just “fall in line” like we always do, he will have learned nothing. His entire career has been based on stabbing us in the back, and we’re supposed to just take it like good little straight-ticket voters.
Enough. I won’t be scared into voting for this guy. Let his Mexican friends vote for him.
(Speaking of which, it doesn’t really matter who wins it now — even if McCain wins, we’ll have a permanent Dem majority for the next 100 years after he legalizes the illegals.)
HYTEAndy on March 16, 2008 at 9:46 AM
Of the things that McCain represents, change is not one of them.
Secondly, conservatives do not need to fall in line behind McCain at his current position. If they want to, fine. But McCain said that he was going to work to unify the party therefore the onus is on him. I don’t consider it working to unify the party if all he does is wait until everyone says…well he’s better than _____. Nor is it working to unify the party to just refer to other people’s endorsements.
Spirit of 1776 on March 16, 2008 at 10:01 AM
I am curious what John McCain’s ACU rating for the year 2007 is going to be.
I suspect it will be a failing grade.
EJDolbow on March 16, 2008 at 10:06 AM
But McCain’s “fiscal conservatism” is offset by the excessive financial drain on hospitals, social services, etc which are a direct consequence of McCain’s support for Amnesty for illegal aliens.
There have been 7 amnesties rewarded to law-breakers since 1986.
I do not believe all this talk about “secure the border first” by McCain, then pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform is genuine at all.
McCain never deals with the big problem of Visa overstays.
Here are the facts.
Even with a perfect “secured border”, we still have the problem of Visa overstays. Passing amnesty only encourages more illegal aliens to break the law. Run the numbers here.
McCain is not a fiscal conservative if he continues to champion “comprehensive immigration reform”. The numbers won’t let him make that claim.
ColtsFan on March 16, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Ed, I think nearly every Republican elected official will get behind McCain with the exception of Ron Paul, so this is largely irrelevant. What’s going to make the difference for McCain will be people for whom voting is optional, people who don’t read the Wall Street Jounral. As McCain voters are more likely to be Democrats and Independnets, one has to wonder how John McCain winning would be able to fix this mess with a Democratic Congress. Yes, John McCain knows how to work across party lines, but only to achieve liberal policy goals.
adamsweb on March 16, 2008 at 10:15 AM
Gov. of South Carolina.
(Just in case I’m not the only one who didn’t know.)
If he’s the VP nom, how long before the piglets are somehow racist AND sexist?
MamaAJ on March 16, 2008 at 10:17 AM
If McCain wants to reduce unnecessary spending, then putting a stop to illegal immigration would be a good start. Illegals cost U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars every year.
Make a real committment to building the border wall (the real, double-layer wall, not that ridiculous “virtual” wall); get rid of that sleazy, “Mexico first” advisor Juan Hernandez; support legislation to end “birthright” citizenship for illegals, impose serious economic penalties on employers who hire illegals, and strip “sanctuary” cities and states of federal funds. Do those things, McCain, and you’ll go a long way toward shoring up your support among conservative voters.
AZCoyote on March 16, 2008 at 10:22 AM
And surely full blown Islamophobia!
Annar on March 16, 2008 at 10:28 AM
I’ve met Mark Sanford. John McCain is no Mark Sanford. Mark Sanford would be wasted saddled with John McPain. Sanford is a GREAT guy and a nearly perfect conservative.
Warner Todd Huston on March 16, 2008 at 11:05 AM
I won’t plant yard signs for McCain (or McAmnesty) until he picks a 100% died in the wool conservative as VP…If that doesn’t occur..I will not be energized, no matter what the Republican establishment says. We need to defeat RINOS and defund their campaigns….we should NOT contribute to GOP campaigns that are not 90%+ conservative, but rather channel our $ to conservative issue groups that will fund TV ads and 100% conservative candidates.
daytrader on March 16, 2008 at 11:11 AM
As if McCain’s “bad” 65% that you cited is just as bad as Obama’s 8% or Hillary’s 9%. You all-or-nothing so-called purists make me puke.
jgapinoy on March 16, 2008 at 11:12 AM
So you all-or-nothing so-called purists are divided! Half say Sanford’s a liar for calling McCain good, & the other half say he’s too perfect to wallow with J-Mac.
The TRUTH is, McCain’s imperfections would be compensated for with a “perfect” conservative like Sanford.
jgapinoy on March 16, 2008 at 11:15 AM
That will get you 100% perfect city councilmen & a few state senators, while the most powerful person in the world will be an ultra-leftist Democrat.
jgapinoy on March 16, 2008 at 11:17 AM
Reagan started this “McAmnesty” business! And that really was amnesty! Did you support him????
jgapinoy on March 16, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Those people are not going to be influenced in the slightest by the opinion of Mark Sanford. They are going to do what they always do: vote for whomever the media tell them to. And by November, all those liberal media “endorsements” of John McCain will be long forgotten.
logis on March 16, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Believe me, this is going to get a lot of libertarian Republicans to pay attention. Sanford is regarded among us libertarians as a hero.
The folks in the Libertarian Party should take notice. They’ve got a furious battle going on right now for the LP nomination for President, with moderate Libertarian Wayne Root as the frontrunner, versus a score of radical Ron Paul types. If the LP goes the radical route, you will see a great many mainstream libertarians, even LP members who would have voted for Root, moving to McCain.
As more and more libertarian Republicans like Sanford come out for McCain, this will make that transition much easier.
ericdondero on March 16, 2008 at 11:47 AM
please stay on point..we’re talking reality, we’re talking today.
you’re avoiding my point. My point is McAmnesty has a choice that he has to take 100% responsibility for, and that is to name a 90%+ conservative VP. He can’t pass the buck on this. If he wants to truely win, he will win if he energeizes his BASE…moderates have never won a election. White Male turnout wins every election.
If he is a competent politician he knows this, he knows how Reagan and Bush 42 won 2x..he won by getting the turnout of white males, evangelicals and Catholic / economic conservative/social liberal democrats.
If he doesn’t make the right decision he deserves to get what he sows..he may or may not win. If he chooses poorly, I will not campaign all out. I’m already in the process of becoming a ex-pat overseas, so you dudes can enjoy our future junk bond status in the States..I won’t be affected by it.
daytrader on March 16, 2008 at 11:49 AM
If Sanford (or similar) is picked, McAmnesty would carry the South, no problem. Turnout could be very high if this occurs. McAmnesty could have a real mandate if he wins because white male/South turnout could be huge. If Sanford is picked, McAmnesty would have to pledge to veto any future amnesty bill, build the wall within 12 months and enforce SSN verification on all employment. Unless McAmnesty pledges this, no 90%+ conservative should join him. The conservative has the leverage, use it before being picked, or lose it. McCain’s fund raising is horrible, he would do it to get the money (hopefully!).
daytrader on March 16, 2008 at 11:55 AM
Because there were no spending caps. Get your facts straight. Between Bush and McCain, McCain is the conservative.
rightwingprof on March 16, 2008 at 12:09 PM
The “true believing” McCain-bashers will give us the most left-wing president ever – a man who will make the Carter years seem like a golden age by comparison.
packsoldier on March 16, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Thanks Governor, but “True Conservatives” won’t do it because a fellow Republican suggested it. They will only do it out of the fear of Liberal Ideology.
THE CHOSEN ONE on March 16, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Gov. Sanford is also begging, pleading, nay demanding, the South Carolina legislature send him a tough-on-illegals bill. They are “working on it” and also watering it down. He isn’t liked by the establishment Repbulicans in SC, and is simply hated by the democrat party there.
I guarantee you, though, if he’s selected as VP all the msm will focus on is showing the confederate flag atop the SC capitol dome when it hasn’t bee there in 8 years. They’re disingenuous to a fault on that.
SouthernGent on March 16, 2008 at 1:17 PM
I submitted my comment around 7:50 AM and am still waiting for it to appear.
AH_C on March 16, 2008 at 2:10 PM
Hmm. That went thru instantly, so the original comment must have triggered a filter. So here goes another attempt:
With the eventual flame-out of both Obambi & cHillary, it really is a shame that McVain is our standard bearer. I respect Sanford, but McVain has yet to renounce/repudiate McVain-Feingold nor McVain-Lieberman, among his support for other legislative monsters. That notwithstanding, I don’t think McVain has the luxury of waiting for the DNC nominee to emerge before announcing his VP & Secretary of State.
He needs to announce #1 & #3 in the line of succession sooner than later in order to rally the conservative base, provided he makes solid choices. Otherwise, he’ll be hawking miracle pills in 2011. Just like Dole, it’ll be his 1st ever private sector job.
You can imagine what word tripped the filters. ;)
AH_C on March 16, 2008 at 2:20 PM
I am a new reader of Hot Air having come having followed Ed from Captains Quarters. It’s nice to see so many commenters with whom I can relate. I especially liked AZCoyote on March 16, 2008 at 10:22 AM. I would suggest that his taxpayers cost of billions might better be stated at tens of billions which is going to go up to hundreds of billions sometime after the new amnesty.
I think of illegal immigration as a national security issue. All of these things affect national security: large ill conceived expenses, gangs, drugs, Jihadists, ill educated citizens, and new voters.
burt on March 16, 2008 at 2:23 PM
davidk on March 16, 2008 at 2:52 PM
I’ll never vote for McCain, and as such I view his VP to be second in command on the Titanic. Republicans such as McCain dug this ditch. Now they can lie in it. As for the “better than the alternative” argument, I think the country has no idea what “progressive” means. The pedulum has to swing even further to the left before it will swing back where it belongs. We can’t even sustain a majority of Americans to support a military response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Do these folks recall the sacrifices made during WWII? Over 400,000 U.S. casualties (at a rate of about 100,000 per year). They fought so we wouldn’t have to. The greatest generation did not whine or complain, but with grim determination they made sacrifices to make the world safe. Now our all volunteer military is called to serve and I hear that today’s Americans don’t like them “fighting in our name.”
How about 21% interest rates, 12% inflation, and 9% unemployment? I survived the Carter years. I am prepared to deal with President Obama. A second President Clinton can be no worse than the first.
Consider me a Hegelian Conservative.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/last_nominee_standing.html
A McCain loss is a necessary precondition before things can get better.
Angry Dumbo on March 16, 2008 at 3:39 PM
For the same reason the 1-year moratorium on earmarks went down Friday 29-71, with majorities of both parties voting against it.
steveegg on March 16, 2008 at 5:08 PM
I used to think this way too. But the main issue that seems to come up every time among my fellow conservatives is illegal immigration. It sucks! But look at the alternative, we in all likelihood are going to lose seats in the house. The next president is most likely going to appoint at least two Supreme Court judges along with prosecuting the war on terror. If the dems win you’ll get open borders and every ACLU, socialist driven agenda they can dream up. McCain is just as or more conservative than Bush. Our job is to hold him accountable like we did with Bush’s original Supreme Court nominees.
kongzilla on March 16, 2008 at 5:27 PM
conservatives plotting to place the socialist in the whitehouse would be wiser if the Repubs. held congress….if ever.
jp on March 16, 2008 at 6:10 PM
Always, eh? Protest voting was a “real winner” in ’92 and ’96 and ’06, huh? But I guess us learning from our mistakes isn’t as important as McCain learning from his.
/sarc
OneGyT on March 17, 2008 at 9:12 AM
Slightly OT, this guy makes a better VP pick than Jindal.
I’m not a big fan of McCain’s, but whoever mentioned the Bush tax cuts as the most important of this century must not remember what tax rates were when Reagan entered office and when he left.
cs89 on March 17, 2008 at 1:40 PM