McCain Courts The Clintonites

So John McCain likes Alito and Scalia, but to Democratic audiences, he notes that he voted for Justices Breyer and Ginsberg too:

Bower said he'd liked McCain's answer on judges, in which he "pointed out that he supported Bill Clinton with both Ginsberg and Breyer."

Another person who was present, but asked not to be named to avoid conflict with fellow Democrats, said he'd pressed a McCain staffer on McCain's position on same-sex marriage.

The staffer "said it was the same as [John] Kerry's position," he said.

The exculpatory answer is that there's a difference between supporting qualified nominees and prefering Alito and Scalia. But, as MK notes, "this is the sort of leftward wink that will drive conservatives crazy, with reason."

Also, the McCain staffer who told a Democrat that McCain's position on same-sex marriage was like John Kerry's is clearly incorrect. McCain and Kerry might oppose same-sex marriage but only in the same way that they both supported the origin of -- and then condemned the Rumsfeldian prosecution -- of the Iraq war. Kerry strongly supports civil unions for gay couples and supports modifications to federal laws that discriminate against gay people; McCain does not.

Comments

Kind of pathetic if the only way McCain has a shot is by trying to pretend to be a Democrat, after months of trying to assure conservatives he's one of them. Which one is it, John?

Posted by Laura | June 16, 2008 10:11 AM

There are other issues besides the Supreme Court. Take health care reform, probably Senator CLinton's signature issue. Do the PUMA people really think that anything positive with health care is going to happen under a McCain presidency?

Posted by Peter H | June 16, 2008 10:23 AM

Given the absence of polling data supporting the fact that these people are of any significant size, I'm not terribly sure why they are still getting so much ink. Having said that I think the fact that they are so easily assured by half-truths (on abortion and same-sex marriage) speaks volumes of their character.

Posted by Greg | June 16, 2008 10:42 AM

Greg,
Don't know how many we are, but trying to impune our character is also a no-starter for getting Clinton Democrats back. This is the kind of bullying that we're sick of. We have made a very reasoned judgement based on all the facts we have. I would worry about the candidate's character. That's more important. Country before Party!

Posted by NPT | June 16, 2008 11:03 AM

NPT, please explain your "country before party" stance. No snark here, I'm just trying to figure out what would draw someone strongly to Hillary and what she stands for, but then push that same person to McCain, who on most key issues stands for the exact opposite of Hillary. We might talk about the character of the individual. I'm guessing you like Bill Clinton and think he was a good president. He also exhibited a pretty clear lack of character at times, both personally and politically, as he moved ever rightward to get reelected. Maybe experience is the key. In that case, many of our presidents have had even less than Obama (Lincoln and FDR) while those with more have proven inept (Hoover being a prime example). In 2000, Bush talked a really good game, making people think he was moderate and bipartisan. But his proposals during the campaign made it clear he would try to ram through a rightwing agenda. I feel the same way about McCain. So, in making my decision on who to support, I've looked at what each candidate would try to do as president. Of the two left, only one comes remotely close to the agenda Hillary would pursue if elected. The other would actively subvert it, pushing the country even further away from where it needs to be.

Posted by NHCt | June 16, 2008 11:25 AM

I don't believe I was impuning the character of Clinton Democrats. I believe I was impuning the character of the small segment of Clinton supporters who are going to vote for man who stands against virtually everything that Hillary ran for-- namely universal healthcare, pro-choice protections, equitable pay for women, homosexual equality, ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, ending the war in Iraq, investing in our infrastructure, an ambitious environmental agenda, ending warrantless wiretapping, and restoring the rule of law and habeas corpus among many, many, many other issues. If you think all those issues can wait another 4 years, then fine, but there's a reason why Hillary gave a full-throated endorsement of Obama so quickly and so loudly-- she doesn't think we can wait.

Posted by Greg | June 16, 2008 11:27 AM

Why hasn't Obama released his May fundraising?

Posted by jay | June 16, 2008 11:32 AM

Why "clearly incorrect"? At the federal level, McCain and (belatedly) Kerry supported DOMA and oppose the FMA. What they want as a matter of state-level policy, however, is, essentially, outside the purview of a federal President--it's a marshmallow world at that point.

Posted by dt | June 16, 2008 11:33 AM

Greg, NPT, et al.: Whether Hilltard or Obamaton, you are both stupid for reading Ambinder's blog. This is not to impugn your character.

Posted by xx | June 16, 2008 11:34 AM

As a lifelong conservative republican I am outraged at McCain. After thinking long and hard I was slowly moving towards to McCain but this incidence proves that McCain is not a conservative and may in fact be a fraud.

I will either stay at home or vote for Barr.

Posted by Walter | June 16, 2008 11:56 AM

"McCain staffer who told a Democrat that McCain's position on same-sex marriage was like John Kerry's is clearly incorrect."

Substitute incorrect for lying.

Posted by P.M.T Barnum | June 16, 2008 12:00 PM

Some Hillary supporters like McCain because he called Chelsea Clinton "ugly".
McCain said, "Chelsea is ugly because "her father is Janet Reno".

Some Hillary supporters like McCain because McCain's internet director calls Hillary a "monster".

Way to go!!

Posted by McCain | June 16, 2008 12:03 PM

It's clear that if Obama supporters called HRC a monster, then to punish such shocking misogyny, they should vote for a man who called his wife a cunt.

Not sure what they think of the remake 'What ever happened to baby McCain' with his first wife.

Posted by P.M.T Barnum | June 16, 2008 12:16 PM

MK has it right. This is too clever by a half, and McCain will lose more conservative votes by doing this than he will gain in Clinton supporters. By pushing the issue, his voting record on issues relevant to women will be much publicized, and be much to his determent, since there is a genuine belief that Sen. McCain is moderate on such issues. And as stated above, McCain has plenty of "non voting" issues in his past when it comes to treating women with respect.

Posted by Ben | June 16, 2008 12:55 PM

McCain mentioned his support for Ginsberg and Breyer in his most recent big speech on judicial philosophy. So he makes this case in front of all audiences. In this instance, this is NOT an example of pandering

Posted by Marcus | June 16, 2008 1:00 PM

McCain mentioned his support for Ginsberg and Breyer in his most recent big speech on judicial philosophy. So he makes this case in front of all audiences. In this instance, this is NOT an example of pandering

Posted by Marcus | June 16, 2008 1:00 PM

Clarification for my comment - Sen. McCain will lose conservative votes by courting her supporters and saying wonderful things about her, making conservatives uneasy. In addition, by courting Clinton supporters, his voting record will be more publicized, thus limiting his gains with said supporters. just my thoughts.

Posted by Ben | June 16, 2008 1:07 PM

Support for Ginsberg and Breyer, while calling the decision last week “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country” by "unaccountable judges".

Shut up Marcus.

Posted by P.M.T Barnum | June 16, 2008 1:08 PM

Whoa! I don't know what you're all talking about! Gross!
I didn't always agree on everything with Bill or Hillary either, but their overall work usually proved good for the country and I always believed they worked for the country's best interest. If McCain is honorable, experienced in world affairs, and patriotic, I would think those good reasons to vote for him. The world is a wild and crazy place these days. Issue by issue we may not agree, but I can tolerate that and I would still support my issues. "Country before Party" because we don't need an inexperienced person at the helm now!

Posted by NPT | June 16, 2008 1:09 PM

At the federal level, McCain and (belatedly) Kerry supported DOMA and oppose the FMA

Kerry voted against the federal DOMA and does not support it.

Posted by DivGuy | June 16, 2008 1:14 PM

>> If McCain is honorable, experienced in world
>> affairs, and patriotic, I would think those good
>> reasons to vote for him. The world is a wild and
>> crazy place these days. Issue by issue we may not
>> agree, but I can tolerate that and I would still
>> support my issues. "Country before Party" because
>> we don't need an inexperienced person at the helm
>> now!

I agree with this sentiment. One should vote for McCain because world is a wild and crazy place these days and McCain is the only crazy old guy who can handle it the same way by continuing the Bush's war for 100 more years, by attacking Iran, by getting confused about basic facts about terrorism. One should vote for McCain because McCain does not understand difference between Sunnis and Shia, because McCain does not know how many troops are in Iraq at the moment, because McCain lies about how safe it is to walk on a Iraqi street, because McCain does not support new GI bill but still receives $57,000/year in disability benefits from govt.

Posted by Cindy | June 16, 2008 2:00 PM

Still and all knows more than BO, who "slips" also when he forgets how many states there are in the Union. OMG. But to each his own. Let the debates begin!

Posted by NPT | June 16, 2008 2:16 PM

Experience is all we need!

McCain/Cheney '08 (note Cheney brings youth to the ticket)

Posted by Greg | June 16, 2008 2:35 PM

I think it a great idea for McCain to promote himself as a candidate that is much like Hillary Clinton. What an imaginative way to further alienate the Republican base and to push even more Independents into the Obama camp. Thanks, John Sidney!

We Democrats had some great candidates to choose from in the primaries. The Republicans were not so happy with their choices and they will end up with the leftovers from 2000. No wonder McCain wants to try to attract some of the enthusiasm shown the Democratic contenders.

I hope all Clinton supporters will look closely at all the stances she shares with Obama. Senator Clinton and Senator Obama share a political philosophy and do not differ on the issues. And then they might look at how McCain is the polar opposite from Hillary Clinton. I consider it a slap in the face to Senator Clinton to vote for McCain who has never championed the causes she stands for. Furthermore, he represents almost everything that Senator Clinton has fought against in advancing the cause of women and minorities.

Posted by eve | June 16, 2008 2:49 PM

If Hillary were the nominee, McCain would be talking about what a great person Obama is and how bad Hillary is. His pandering is unbelievably blatant, I'm not surprised Hillary's voters are moving to Obama in larger and larger numbers!

Posted by Brandon | June 16, 2008 2:54 PM

What's especially strange is McCain's doing this using a video of Abba (and I like Abba), an affirmation from a supporter who claims "this isn't logical, it's emotional" (link from blog to ThePage), and a crazy Jefferson descendant who tries to keep the black Jefferson descendants away from the family reunion. They have a very odd (and unflattering) view of what Clinton supporters would like. (Hillary on the ticket I imagine would do it, but given the expression on some of his supporters faces when he launches into carefully scripted lauding of Hillary words, I don't see it happening.)

NPT, I really truly do not get how a slip of the tongue to refer to 57 contests when he meant 47 contests should garner the excitement you seem to hope for. (It reminds me of the revelation that he employs a speechwriter.) It really isn't up there with McCain's mixing of Shia and Sunni, or his flips on the Bush tax cuts and flops on whether torture is okay if you're the CIA.

Posted by Deborah | June 16, 2008 4:22 PM

Greg above said: "Given the absence of polling data supporting the fact that these people are of any significant size,..."

This statement is not necessarily true. The Clinton diehards who are having media pressers with McCain may be very small in number. But the polls are showing between 15-20% of Clinton supporters intending to vote for McCain and another 20% or so undecided. These are large enough numbers to cause concern in the Obama camp.

Posted by Mitch | June 16, 2008 6:24 PM