All of McCain's Base Belongs to Us: Why It Won't Even Be Close

It's over.

It's mathematically impossible for John McCain to win.

Were the great Tim Russert still with us, he would call the election for Obama at 7pm Eastern time. No, I'm not talking about November 4th -- I mean tonight.

Here we are in the present -- an electric casserole of breaking news ("Obama wears flag pin!"), Internet warfare ("lol McCain is teh oldz!"), and screaming gas bags who are terrified of women ("We'll do it LIVE!"). The MSM is trying to convince us that we're in for a twelve-round brawl. That McCain's going to give Obama a run for his $500M. That's all well and good, and I'm sure it'll make for some riveting television -- if you're the type of person who still watches Harlem Globetrotters games on the edge of your seat, convinced the Washington Generals will pull this one out.

But the truth is, it's not going to be close. Not even a little bit.

Imagine yourself in a high school history class a century from now. Imagine the teacher beginning the section on the elections of 2008 by setting the scene: "America's economy was in flames, we were fighting two wars with no end in sight, and global warming was accelerating at an alarming rate. The most despised president in 150 years was nearing the end of his two corruption-ridden terms, and had heartily endorsed his successor, John McCain -- who, despite a few ideological differences, planned on keeping the status quo intact. Running against him was a lightning-in-a-bottle candidate named Barack Obama. A candidate who had nearly six times the money to spend, drew crowds of 70,000, and who received support from a surprising number of disenfranchised Republicans -- even some of the Evangelicals who swept Bush to power. Obama was the story. He captured the imagination of young Americans and the world. Now, by a show of hands -- who thinks McCain won that election?" (A particularly easy question, since they're sitting in Barack Obama High).

Whatever you think about McCain -- whether you love him or hate him -- you can't deny that he's a victim of horrible timing. Everywhere you look, there are tidal forces -- geopolitical, economic, and social forces -- trending in Obama's favor. McCain is running on a war record in a country aching for peace. He's running on an admitted lack of economic knowledge in a country aching for economic reform. Healthcare, foreign policy, energy -- in each case his sales pitch is twenty years behind the curve, much like the declining party for which he has the unfortunate honor of being standard bearer. Worst of all, his base doesn't even like him. Sure, they might pull that lever, but they'll be holding their noses with the other hand. If Obama's base is "fired up and ready to go," McCain's base is more like "reheated and I'll get around to it."

All McCain's base are belong to us.

Call it whatever you want: arrogance, a jinx -- but let's be honest with ourselves -- this thing is over. I know, I know. "A lot can happen between now and November." I know that we Democrats are used to scurrying around like we're on Meerkat Manor, with a sky full of Neocon hawks overhead. I know that we've perfected the art of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. But can't you feel it in the smog-kissed air? Feel that this year is different? This year, we've got a candidate who refuses to cower in the face of the old Rove/Atwater/Dobson line of attack. A candidate who understands that you can't change the world unless you win, and that you don't have to sell your soul to do it. And despite some bruises, we've got a Democratic Party on its way toward unprecedented unity and energy.

I don't care if footage of Obama snorting coke off Scarlett Johansson's boobs surfaces in late October. All it will do is bolster his standing with white males. I don't care if McCain is introduced by a resurrected Jesus Christ at the convention. All it will do is piss off Joe Lieberman. McCain won't just be defeated, he'll be crushed. And not just Bob Dole crushed, but crushed in a way that redefines the political map for the next 25 years.

He'll be crushed so decidedly, that bartenders will coin a new drink called "The McCrush" -- vodka and Orange Crush over crushed ice, served in a hollow flip-flop with a sprig of pandering. The networks will switch over to infomercials at 10pm on Election Night, because they'll have nothing left to cover after Obama's victory speech. Webster's will add the word "McCained" to its thesaurus entry for "crushed." Gamers will start taunting each other with new words like "Obampwnd!" and "McNoob!." Somewhere, out there in the everlasting ether of death, Barry Goldwater will feel better about himself.

Jinx or no jinx, I'm not going to be a Meerkat Democrat -- not this year. This year, I'm celebrating the Fourth with some burgers, some fireworks, and a nice, cool McCrush.

This year I'm the friggin' hawk.

Seth Grahame-Smith is the author of Pardon My President: Ready-to-Mail Apologies for Eight Years of George W. Bush

Comments

[jbatch]

OK Seth, Let's take tha high school teacher scenario one step further -- Imagine explaining why Obama started drifting center right, abandoning the winning positions, and actually adopted a Bob Shrumm strategy that had lost two previous elections for the Democrats.

Imagine trying to explain that to your class two decades hence.

Your conclusion would have to be ... he had it sod up, but for some reason, he adopted a failed strategy and lost.

Look, being Republican light has never worked ... he's excited millions of non-voters and brought them to the polls with his progressive and populist postitions, and now he seems hell-bent on putting them to sleep and sending them home.

And if he does, we lose.

[SaltySaltillo]

jbatch - i don't know where you and everyone else in the progressive left gets the idea that Obama has "drifted" to the right... It was obvious for all to see who were paying attention 4 or 5 months ago - Obama was a centrist candidate on so many issues - health care, education, faith, social enginerring etc. Not a triangulator, but a centrist. Haven't you been reading Krugman's somewhat overzealous rants for the last 6 months about how in this election, Clinton, not Obama, was the true progressive? (if the only thing you knew about Obama was what you read in Krugman's editorials, you would think he was the reincarnation of George H.W.Bush). The point is, I have always recognized Obama for being a moderate democrate and have been astounded by the blindness of (a) the progressives who think he is some Ralpha Nadar redux and (b) Neocons who think he is some crazed Trotskyist.

[Marlyn]

"It was obvious for all to see who were paying attention 4 or 5 months ago - Obama was a centrist candidate on so many issues" ???

But is was NOT obvious that he would fail to uphold the Constitution, first on FISA, now by EXPANDING GW Bush's illegal funding of religious groups.

[jbatch]

He opposed Iraq, torture, NFTA, FISA, tax cuts and he had an almost perfect progressive record in his Senate Votes according to several of the vote tallying groups like the LCV. That's where I got the "idea" that he was a prgressive.

He started slightly center during the early campaignm moved steadily left and returned to his progressive roots after Edwards dropped out.

If you want to comment on politics, get the facts, Sally.

I do read Krugman, and his near jihad on Obama seems to center on his health care plan, which is pretty wishy washy. But look at his position on Labor, taxes, energy, defense etc and he's to the left -- no Trotskyist, mind you, firmly in the prgressive camp.

But here's the deal -- moving right has lost us two elections.

More than 30 million eligible voters failed to show up in the polls in either of the last two Presicential elections, and Obama's competitive advanatage is that he turned them out.

Do you think they'll rally around a guy whose vision for America is "Change? -- Sure let's split the difference­." No and hell no.

His strength is in getting millions of young and disaffected voters to show up because he promised to represent THEM. If he drifts center, they'll crawl back into the woodwork and we'll lose.

In essence, this centrist/ Bob Shrumm unStrategy is tossing away millions of potential voters to get a few hundred thousand possibles.

Does THAT make any sense?

[Marlyn]

"A candidate who had nearly six times the money to spend" ???

That was last week. This week and from now on, NO MORE MONEY FOR BARACK.

[LeftistGuerrilla]

The RNC has 7 times as much money as the DNC. Basically all from corporate donors. This can be used to elect John McCain.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the Meerkats.

[Marlyn]

"It's over. It's mathematically impossible for John McCain to win." ???

NONSENSE.

[rmwarnick]

Just when you think a catchphrase is gone for good, somebody revives it. Long live "all your base are belong to us"!

[lylo]

:D I'm not the only one who remembers!!!

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

The great thing about the electoral college system in this case (one can only hope), is that if McSame loses each state 49-51, he might even get fewer EC votes than the previous low in recent times... George McGovern, who lost 520-17 to one Richard Millhouse "Tricky Dick" Nixon.

(McGovern lost the popular vote 60%-38%. McCain has a good chance to do even worse.)

The Republicans have been riding that combo of feeling coronated, entitled, then defiled, for 36 years.

After nine elections -- including two ERECTIONS (one by SCOTUS, one by theft) -- time the foot was in the other shoe.

[MrMephistoX]

Let's think for a second...l­aw suits against the telecoms would cost them billions which would then be passed along to Joe and Mary consumer in the form of higher bills each month. It's unfortunate but that is how retroactive law-suits would pan out, enriching the legal teams responsible to the tune of millions with affected consumers netting a few hundred dollars at best and increased rates for everyone else. NUANCE people NUANCE!

What's done is done go after Bush and Cheney.

[Marlyn]

What a joke. You think that nothing can be done about the law breaking telcoms, and yet something can be done about Bush and Cheney?

[Angelus2007]

I'm going to say it. "Alot can happen between now and November." Now that I said it, it is true. Do I think Obama will win? Probably, but it won't be a landslide like you mentioned. Will it be as close as 2000 or even 2004? No, I am guessing 320-219 something like that. We won't be waiting until the wee hours of the morning, but we won't be able to go to sleep at 8pm (eastern time atleast) knowing who won either. There are just too many states that will vote McCain to keep a huge landslide from happening. Also we don't even know who the running mates will be. Romney may push Michigan into McCains column, or a Huckabee may negate any religous inroads Obama made with his faith based initiaves.

Finally, you say the landslide will change the landscape for 25 years. Isn't that what they thought in 1984 when Reagan beat Mondale? Mondale only got Minnesota (his home state) and DC. Reagan got all the rest, including California (OK he was governor), New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts and other solid blue states. Yet the landscape didn't change for 25 years, in the 24 years since, we have had democratic congress for 12, and a republican congress for 12, the republicans won 3 elections to the democrats 2 elections. Not a reformed landsacape.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

From your lips to anyone willing to pander to the religious right. ;-)

BTW, "BOHS" will be a Cristian charter school using city-owned buildings and honoring vouchers.

[lpeggy]

The Repugs are toast.

[HAYMONBRANDON]

I AGREE BUT LET'S GET TO AUGUST FIRST AND THEN WE WILL SEE. I AM FOR OBAMA ALL THE WAY I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY COME UP WITH AND YOU CAN BE SURE THE RIGHT WILL. ALSO SOME ARE MAD BECAUSE HE IS MOVING TO THE CENTER MAN THIS IS WAY THE GAME IS PLAYED . LET HIM GET TO THE WHITE HOUSE REMEMBER BUSH IS STILL THE PRESIDENT . WE HAVN'T HAD THE ELECTION YET . THE CANDIDATES ARE JUST TALKING THEY CAN'T DO ANY THING NOW.

[mike53]

When McCain got the nomination I said I would not vote for him. The more I read articles like yours the more inclined I am to vote for McCain, just out of spite. I would remind you of one thing. In 2004 just about everyone thought the democratic party was toast, including democrats. Things can change fast.

[TheEmptinessOfTruthiness]

You vote out of spite?

Seems kinda shallow.

There's gotta be more to it?

[ebanks84]

I hope your spite makes you a better person in the end. That's the craziest thing I've ever heard.

[bakersdozen]

Don't forget that you'd be spiting yourself.

[dadele]

Voting out of spite? Haven't you spite voters hurt yourselves enough with your recent votes to set your family back a generation or more?

[LABC]

spite...no­se-holding­...what great options you guys have this fall. That is going to be one fun GOP conventtion.

[DoNuts]

Awesome. I feel exactly the same way...
I see some people getting all up in airs because Obama is expanding the faith-based initiative - and to you I say you have obviously no idea what a good thing this is. I don't believe it is pandering at all - anyone who has worked as a community organizer or at the grass roots level knows how important churches of ALL kinds are to the underserved and poverty stricken. Just because we are leftists and progressives doesn't mean we are communists and blind to the diversity that makes this country great. So chill, you can't have everything your way... Have faith in your candidate - this country is in a huge mess and he needs to be able to navigate through the shark infested neocon waters.

I loved this article!

[Marlyn]

"I see some people getting all up in airs because Obama is expanding the faith-based initiative" ???

I'm one of those people. It is against the Constitution for our government to give money to churches.

[reuscel]

Agreed, but he's not giving them money to proselytize and convert. He's saying that faith-based organizations are an important aspect of the charity work that helps the poor and disenfranchised (you know, those people we Democrats are supposed to support and want to help). I'm an atheist, but as long as these faith-based organizations aren't getting more cash to try and convert more followers, and instead doing good work that helps the indigent and least-fortunate Americans, then it's fine with me. My mother is a churchgoer. Her church has a daily soup kitchen that gives free meals to the less fortunate. There is no sermon to sit through, and no one is trying to convert anyone. They're just helping the less fortunate, and doing what they feel is their Christian duty. So, because their selflessness was inspired by Christianity, it's invalid and doesn't deserve funding from the government? You better take a good look at what Obama is really talking about with this initiative, and keep your prejudices to yourself.

[noam4prez]

Sorry, Seth, to be a wet blanket, but ... we're talking about a country that voted for GWBush twice. A country that thinks Ronald Reagan was a hero. Remember, these guys are willing to kill a million Iraqis for the profit of their cronies, not to mention sacrificing thousands of our most patriotic young men and women.

This is not over.

[S1m0n]

"we're talking about a country that voted for GWBush twice..."

By the narrowest of margins. Since that day, a cascade of events that experience has taught us always move the bar away from the party in power has occurred.

[dadele]

I agree. If they will go to war over control of the Iraqi oil fields and let thousands of Americans be killed for them, what will they do to keep control here?

[lylo]

No, the country didn't vote for Bush twice. The Supreme Court appointed him. And somehow, that was okay. I was a child at the time, but I doubt you were. What did you do to stop it?

[noam4prez]

Well, once Gore walked away, it was over. But I joined MoveOn Political Action as a local team leader in my community in prep for 2004. Members of my family worked for the Dean campaign at his headquarters in VT. I went door to door, held house parites, went to the NYC demonstrations at the RNC convention.

And, yet, even with the efforts of millions of volunteers and small donations adding up to tens of millions of dollars, and after the invasion of Afg and Iraq, based on obvious lies, after the Patriot Act, GWBush was still re-elected.

That's why I say this is not over.

[FiveFortyOne]

"I know that we Democrats are used to scurrying around like we're on Meerkat Manor, with a sky full of Neocon hawks overhead." - lol ... so true. Loved the article!

[PATina]

This year, we've got a candidate who refuses to cower in the face of the old Rove/Atwater/Dobson line of attack.

Oh realy? Hmmm.... so why hasn't he still shown up at a Mosque??? Afraid to give little boy's "fist jabs"???

A candidate who understands that you can't change the world unless you win, and that you don't have to sell your soul to do it.

No... he doesn't have to sell his soul... just lie a little bit.

And despite some bruises, we've got a Democratic Party on its way toward unprecedented unity and energy.

Only because they refuse to remove the blinders.


Seriously though.... I want Obama to win and believe he will... but I can't just give him a free pass. I have to hold him to the same standards that I held HRC to and I couldn't tolerate her anything to win campaign. Why should I accept Obama doing the same thing? I can't stand JMac's flip flopping all over the place. Why should I allow Obama to follow in his footsteps?

This is a nice cheerleading piece though.

[cosmic]

oh god get over it already. Being concerned and fastidious about his image isn't lying. Being consistent in his policy positions despite demands from some progressives isn't either.

[PATina]

Being concerned and fastidious about his image isn't lying. Being consistent in his policy positions despite demands from some progressives isn't either.


No... but saying you won't support a bill... and then saying you will... is lying.

I can only imagine your comments if HRC or Mc Cain did the same thing. At least you can hold O bama to the same standards.­.. but then... you just may not have any.

[LABC]

here...woo­d, bearings, beams, hammer, saw...buil­d a bridge and get over it already...­something tells me you would find fault with a sunny, 71 degree day.

[PATina]

No... I but I do get mad when the promise of a 71 degree day turns into rain.

[Marlyn]

"we've got a Democratic Party on its way toward unprecedented unity and energy." ???

That was last week. Now we've got "Poof! There goes my crush on Obama."

[Annette]

Sounds like a crush to me. "The object of my crush must be perfect in every way or I don't like him any more"

If people would risk McCain stacking the court they deserve what they get, but the rest of us don't. No, Obama doesn't agree with my beliefs on quite a few things. I want a single payer government administered health care system. I want FISA to be adheared to, I want decent schools. Obama isn't perfect but I won't risk McCain stacking the courts with Scalia clones, Those who won't vote for Obama because he isn't absolutely in lockstep with you on every issue. Well I hope you realize that McCain is even more off the reservation. If not, there is no hope for you.