Rebranding Republicans: McCain's Conundrum

While Barack Obama is at last able to claim the Democratic nomination, John McCain has had the luxury of months to work on "rebranding" a Republican Party grown very tarnished due to the economic downturn and the deep unpopularity of George W. Bush and the Iraq War. But a day spent recently following McCain around California points up how difficult a task he has in store. And how short he remains of the mark.

McCain's conundrum was obvious even before his defensive attempt this week to counter-program Obama's victory speech, in which he protested a bit too much about how different he is from Bush even as his campaign was confirming that he is now in line with the president in agreeing that surveillance of international phone calls and e-mails need not be approved by the secret FISA court, which has routinely rubber-stamped requests.

In a sense, it shouldn't be hard for McCain. He's a famous man, a famous war hero, a famous maverick. He has his own image. He ran against Bush, and was savaged by him. He's famously bucked the party line. But it may be one thing to be an insurgent in an unpopular party, as he was in 2000. It may be quite another to be its nominee.

I hooked up on the road with McCain late last month in California's glitzy Silicon Valley and rural Central Valley. Far from departing from Republican orthodoxy, McCain, who did not seem a happy warrior, mostly embraced it.

He was joined at an economic roundtable in Silicon Valley by several tech titans, and the politician who succeeded in rebranding his own Republicanism, Arnold Schwarzenegger. It was in California, with Schwarzenegger's backing, where McCain essentially won the Republican nomination, knocking out Mitt Romney. It was in California where Schwarzenegger, after veering disastrously to the right in a 2005 special election, recast himself as a global warming-fighting/infrastructure-building centrist and easily sloughed off Democratic attempts to make him out to be a Bush clone.

But in his California trip, McCain hewed pretty heavily to the party line, even as he said he aims to make a real run at the state in which Bush and the Republican brand are in the dumpster. In Silicon Valley, the Vietnam War hero talked up the need to cut greenhouse gases, his hoped-for silver bullet talisman demonstrating his non-Bushieness. But he also talked up Bushonomics: Lower corporate taxes, disdain for the capital gains tax, reduced regulation. And he attacked Obama for wanting to "unilaterally renegotiate NAFTA." The same thing his roundtable moderator and national co-chair, billionaire former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, said. Some Republicans, fearful that the governorship will go back to the Democrats after the term-limited Schwarzenegger departs at the end of 2010, look to this former Romney national finance co-chair to make a run.

But these very positions were contradicted by a new poll showing most voters in very sharp disagreement. And certainly voters in industrial swing states mistrust this sort of free trade dogma.

The most striking moment of the roundtable came from Schwarzenegger. He's come to emphasize the climate change issue so much that he's lionized by many environmentalists and magazine covers for his stance, notwithstanding all his jet and SUV travel, for which he must have purchased the equivalent of a small rain forest in carbon offsets. Schwarzenegger, who McCain advisors say is a role model for rebranding, broke through the corporate decorum of the event by saying that government has to intervene to force Detroit to make clean new vehicles. "They have a billboard there attacking me, saying 'Schwarzenegger to Detroit: Drop Dead.' I say Schwarzenegger to Detroit, get off your butt!" This got the biggest burst of applause of anything said during the session, from the crowd of Silicon Valley types and mostly moderate Republicans in the audience.

And here we see the core of McCain's problem. Schwarzenegger pitched his electoral resurrection almost entirely around an appeal to independents and moderate voters. He mostly ignored the noisy leadership of the Republican base, which came to loathe him, not that he seems to care. (And he never set foot near George W. Bush.) But in the end, they had nowhere else to go.

McCain has a similar situation, as his high command knows. A Republican base increasingly out of step with mainstream thinking. A path to victory that requires the ability to appeal to the burgeoning ranks of independents through a creative (not split the difference) centrism.

But despite his reputation as a maverick, and his evident heroism in the Navy, he's being much less bold. He runs the risk of fading into the woodwork in comparison to the charismatic Obama.

In a speech that afternoon before a rally in the Central Valley town of Stockton, McCain played the Iraq and Iran cards, before a crowd of 500 or so of the party faithful. With a crowd revved up by thunderous rock music and the even more thunderous sound of a group of motorcyclists revving their engines way past the redline, McCain played the patriotism card in much the way that Bush and Karl Rove would recommend, saying that Obama wants to "surrender in Iraq."

He seemed to have a sense of personal pique about Obama, who was criticizing him for voting against the new GI bill carried by McCain's old friend Jim Webb. He described Obama as "a very young man and a very inexperienced man," unqualified to even venture an opinion on veterans affairs "since he never served" and certainly not trustworthy enough to defend America.

McCain had already chosen, fatefully, to endorse Bush's remarks in Israel widely viewed as casting the "appeasement" label on Obama's willingness to talk with hostile nations. McCain took the bait and defended Bush from the furious counter-attack mounted against him from across the Democratic Party. "I think it is an unacceptable position," said McCain, "and shows that Senator Obama does not have the knowledge, the experience, the background to make the kind of judgments that are necessary to preserve this nation's security."

Ironically, McCain had just prior to that given a better speech than Tuesday night's rather awkward effort in which he asserted his independence from Bush and sketched out a vision of America at the end of his first term as president. Among other things, McCain -- seeking to get the "100 years war" trope out of circulation -- made clear his intent to withdraw most US forces from Iraq by January 2013. Remaining forces are out of the business of direct combat. Victory is defined as a less bad situation. But not anywhere near the pipe dreams of the war's original architects.

Which, of course, will be very hard to pull off without engaging Iran, perhaps the key power broker in Iraq.

He talked up the climate change issue and then decried "a hyperpartisanship that treats every serious challenge facing us as an opportunity to trade insults, disparage each other's motives, and fight about the next election."

But that's what McCain is doing now, disparaging motives and tossing insults. And even on climate change, he has a problem. For, while he has done some things in the field, he has opposed various efforts to promote renewable energy sources through green tech and impose higher fuel efficiency standards. Without a strong commitment to those efforts, the cap & trade program he has in mind for greenhouse gases won't be enough.

His ally Schwarzenegger has been much bolder in seizing the independent mantle, accelerating state requirements for utilities to include renewables in their energy mix and, working with former Governor-turned-Attorney General Jerry Brown, fighting the auto industry and the Bush Administration in court to get cleaner and more efficient cars.

In my talks with McCain advisors, they are very well aware that this is a very rough year for Republicans. Bush has a near record low approval rating. Fully 80% of voters think America is on the wrong track. Republicans have lost three straight special elections in seemingly safe congressional districts. Virginia Congressman Tom Davis, former National Republican Campaign Committee chairman, says that Bush is simply "radioactive."

The Republican brand is battered. The Democratic brand is significantly more popular. And independents are on the rise.

In this environment, a strategy focused principally on mobilizing the base, as in the 2000 and 2004 elections, will fail. Even if Rev. Wright is conveniently ranting his infamous greatest hits 24/7 on all media outlets and all the other Obama boogie men -- Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, Rashid Khalidi -- become household names. That doesn't mean these associations won't be issues. It does mean they won't be as determinative as many have it in their perfervid imaginings.

McCain has to hold on to a declining base and at the same time appeal to moderates and independents.

Why isn't McCain bolder in demonstrating his independence from Bush -- with whom he voted 95% of the time last year -- and breaking free from obviously unpopular partisan orthodoxy?

Does he really need Bush that badly to raise money? One key difference between McCain and Schwarzenegger is that the governor didn't need any help in that department.

Is he afraid to offend the Talk Radio Wing of the Republican Party, which he actually defeated in the Republican primaries?

Does he believe that if he strikes out on a more independent course that core Republicans voters will sit on their hands and allow a young liberal black man to become the next President of the United States?

Or is he really, with a few signal exceptions, much more a part of that increasingly unpopular Republican orthodoxy than he would like to admit?

He doesn't have much longer to come up with the right answers, if he can.

Comments

[BADEN]

"Why isn't McCain bolder in demonstrating his independence from Bush -- with whom he voted 95% of the time last year -- and breaking free from obviously unpopular partisan orthodoxy?"

Why? Because he's more of a Neo-Con that Bush could ever be.

He is the LEADER of the INTERNATIONAL REPUBLICAN Institute...who in the WORLD would want an INTERNATIONAL REPUBLICAN after the last 8 years of fascist-'cohersive democracy'?

And just WHAT in the WORLD is an INTERNATIONAL Republican....you might have guessed it - EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES with a backdoor into his proverbial nemesis: The COMMIES - yes - the old fool is still fighting the Cold War Boogiemen.

Take a look:

http://www.iri.org.ge/

And, here's there nifty new site for IRAQ....

http://www.iraq-iri.org/

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

McCain is actually not a neocon. He's actually a standard national security Republican. The groomsmen at his wedding were moderate Republican Bill Cohen and neoliberal Democrat Gary Hart.

He opposed the Rumsfeld plan for the invasion of Iraq, supporting the generals who wanted more troops, and has not been the favorite of the real neocons. Though some are now clinging to him, since they have nothing left.

Labels without historical knowledge are a bad thing.

>Why? Because he's more of a Neo-Con that Bush could ever be.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Being anti-Communist is not the same as being a neocon.

Many of the neocons were draft dodgers in the Vietnam era.

[Synoia]

"The Republican brand is battered. "

Bullshit. What's battered are their policies, ideology, ideas, and governing skills.

These can't be fixed by a PR campaign. These require effort and thought. They need a brand new product, which is going to be really hard to make, becuase they are all about "War, Guns, God & Gays".

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Actually, as I'm quite sure I make clear to the reader, the best marketing is good product development. You may not like the terminology, but if you get past that I think will you see what I am saying.

>Bullshit. What's battered are their policies, ideology, ideas, and governing skills.

[beaupritchard]

Alpo ... by any other name ... is still dog food

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Or, as an old marketing friend of mine put it, the problem with the campaign is that dogs don't like it. :)

>Bullshit. What's battered are their policies, ideology, ideas, and governing skills.

[Passenger57]

McCain's in deep doo-doo.In 2000,the Bush Machine torpedoed him and his family-and now he's hugging on Bush (literally) and his policies. This time around, somehow he survived the other contenders-and when he got to the top of the heap, the Republicans said, "McCain? ehhh.....". I'd like to ask McCain how it feels to be with a party that keeps kicking you in the teeth.
Now,McCain's running against a man that makes it look like a contest between a Ford Fairmount and a Podracer. It's going to be painfully obvious that McCain missed his window. His voice is "un-Presid­ential",ev­en more so compared with Obama's. If he keeps making speeches like he just did,he's gonna scare voters to Obama's side.If the "wrong" thing is brought up in any debate,I think McCain might blow a gasket.
I think this is going to be JFK and Nixon all over again - the fresh,dynamic speaker vs. the older,swea­ty,not-ver­y-photogen­ic (does McCain just EAT cigarettes?) old-school guy.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

McCain "somehow" survived the Republican primaries because he was the only plausible candidate, and Republican voters were smart enough to look past the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Ingrahams, et.

BTW, you'd better hope this is not JFK vs. Nixon. JFK won by an eyelash.

>McCain's in deep doo-doo.In 2000,the Bush Machine torpedoed him and his family-and now he's hugging on Bush (literally) and his policies. This time around, somehow he survived the other contenders-and when he got to the top of the heap, the Republicans said, "McCain? ehhh.....". I'd like to ask McCain how it feels to be with a party that keeps kicking you in the teeth.
Now,McCain's running against a man that makes it look like a contest between a Ford Fairmount and a Podracer. It's going to be painfully obvious that McCain missed his window. His voice is "un-Presid­ential",ev­en more so compared with Obama's. If he keeps making speeches like he just did,he's gonna scare voters to Obama's side.If the "wrong" thing is brought up in any debate,I think McCain might blow a gasket.
I think this is going to be JFK and Nixon all over again - the fresh,dynamic speaker vs. the older,swea­ty,not-ver­y-photogen­ic (does McCain just EAT cigarettes?) old-school guy.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

That's a great line!

>Now,McCain's running against a man that makes it look like a contest between a Ford Fairmount and a Podracer.

[MacTheBlogger]

Rebranding the Republicans? For THIS November?

I'm reminded of the scene in "Titanic", where the massive doomed ship is heading for the iceberg. It's too big, and has too much momentum to turn far enough to avoid disaster. It simply wasn't physically possible in such a short amount of time.

The GOP may as well start gearing up for 2012, this is gonna be UGLY.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm sorry. Did I seem to suggest the effort was going well?! :)

>McCain's in deep doo-doo.In 2000,the Bush Machine torpedoed him and his family-and now he's hugging on Bush (literally) and his policies. This time around, somehow he survived the other contenders-and when he got to the top of the heap, the Republicans said, "McCain? ehhh.....". I'd like to ask McCain how it feels to be with a party that keeps kicking you in the teeth.
Now,McCain's running against a man that makes it look like a contest between a Ford Fairmount and a Podracer. It's going to be painfully obvious that McCain missed his window. His voice is "un-Presid­ential",ev­en more so compared with Obama's. If he keeps making speeches like he just did,he's gonna scare voters to Obama's side.If the "wrong" thing is brought up in any debate,I think McCain might blow a gasket.
I think this is going to be JFK and Nixon all over again - the fresh,dynamic speaker vs. the older,swea­ty,not-ver­y-photogen­ic (does McCain just EAT cigarettes?) old-school guy.

[peterv]

Mccain has stepped back from his fiscal responsible image, but nontheless tries to give same populist impression with his hallmark of reducing or eliminating earmarks. This proposal amount to less than 1% of overall budget and won't come even close to close the gap of tax cuts he envisioned.

Start with $100 billion for extending current tax cuts for the highest earners. Add to that an additional $50 billion it would cost to eliminate the alternative minimum tax for the highest earners, another McCain proposal. Throw in $200 billion to $300 billion in corporate-tax cuts and you have a cost of $350 billion to $450 billion a year. That works out to $3.5 trillion to $4.5 trillion over 10 years.

National Debt

This isn't even the full cost of the McCain tax agenda. Rather, these huge additions to our $5.3 trillion national debt are on top of the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts for families earning less than $250,000 -- a policy that McCain and Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton all support.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Well, it's actually worse than that, because he also proposes some expensive industrial policies to ameliorate trade dislocations, which can't be paid for under his current program.

[Mitchell4A]

McCain is in serious trouble. He is caught. He needs to pull away from Bush but needs the Right that supports Bush. He must square the circle. On a list of a (baker's) dozen reasons why McCain won't win, I have as #1 and #2.

1. The McBush factor. McCain’s support of the Iraq War will make it impossible for him to break from Bush, the most unpopular president in living memory. The photo/video of McCain hugging and being kissed by Bush will become increasingly embedded in the collective consciousness of the American people as the months roll on.

2. The Republican factor. Yes, McCain is a Republican. He will not be able to deny this fact. Currently, this is not the best party to have behind you in a push to the White House. Witness the recent loss of three traditionally Republican congressional seats and the declining number of Americans willing to identify themselves as Republicans. And then there are the comments of Congressman Tom Davis. “The political atmosphere facing House Republicans this November is the worst since Watergate and is far more toxic than it was in 2006” (NY Times, May 15th, 2008).

"A Dozen Reason Why McCain Won't Win: Money Back Guarantee"
http://msa4.wordpress.com/page/2/

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Yes, that is his conundrum. Because somehow he lacks the boldness to believe that he the base will vote for him anyway as the alternative is the young liberal black guy.

>McCain is in serious trouble. He is caught. He needs to pull away from Bush but needs the Right that supports Bush. He must square the circle. On a list of a (baker's) dozen reasons why McCain won't win, I have as #1 and #2.

[Oldbuck]

The old saying when I was in the Saving & Loan business was the Republicans are the best government money can buy. McCain better come out with a new Republican brand because they are not going to have enough left in Washington to hold a quorum. If the economy does not improve there will be a bounty on Republicans. What a joke poor old McCain is as smart as a rock, he does not know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite. He forgot whither he is for are against Bush tax cuts I think the reason he changed is mind was his wife told to. He was far wire tapping until he got mix up with that little lobbyist then he got to worrying about it.

[Cugel]

McSame just can't go too far with his "Mavericky-ness" or they will think he's really not a conservative. Remember that whatever the rest of us may think, 66% of Republicans STILL think Bush was right about everything and they expect their nominee to share their beliefs.

I was stopped at a light and the guy in the pickup next to me had Rush Limbaugh LOUD on the radio so I couldn't help but hear and I heard a caller to his show say "I guess I'll vote for McCain, but I don't really like him, not like the great George W. Bush."

That's McCain's problem in a nutshell. Bush could get away with a wink to the right-wing because they trusted him. They knew he was really a conservative in sheep's clothing. But the wing-nuts don't really trust McCain. They've made their peace with him, but it's only because they couldn't find anybody else and he was the lesser of 4 or 5 evils.

He's walking a tight-rope which makes his campaign seem wishy-washy, because the base of his party wants Reagan to return from the grave and lead them like it's 1980 again. They don't WANT change and will only follow McCain if they are sure he isn't serious about it.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

That's well put. But on the other hand, would they sit on their hands and let a young liberal black guy get elected president instead?

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

They've had months to reinvent the brand and haven't done it yet.

[elizaW]

McCain has a hugely important message that is coming through loud and clear to white-collar workers. Those workers know, based on statements that Obama has made, that an Obama presidency means significant increases in income tax. Also last year Obama co-sponsored the Fair Pay Act which would have forced firms to pay men and women the same wages. The gimmick here is it's not the same wages for the same work but the same wages for work the governent deemed equivalent. I'm not the only one who thinks that's not only crazy but a little too socialistic for this country. Obama talks a lot about how he would spend our tax money but doesn't address the issue of how to keep America profitable. The answer is not pull troops out of Iraq. It's a lot more complicated than that. We all know that people need help and fairness is something to strive for but Obama's financial policies are dangerous and voters are taking note.

[Oldbuck]

Yea the working people like send their tax money to Halliburton, KBR, Blackwater and all those other companies. Heck they don't even know where half of the money is spent in Iraq this is being a real conservative. What a joke

[Valkyrie]

Hahahaha. That's funny. Obama's financial policies are dangerous? In what world are you living in? It seems to me that more voters are taking note of Bush and McSame's economic policies and how we've been bled of our savings and employment over the last near-decade.

I mean, really. I don't see how any one in their right mind could even comprehend calling Obama's policies dangerous when Bush's policies have made millions of voters homeless, jobless and more importantly . . . hopeless.

Get your head out of the sand and look around. Your neighbors are hurting.

[elizaW]

valkrie

Perhaps you should study up on economics and then you'll discover that the prosperity that this country still enjoys is based on a free market system. If you think things are difficult now, they can be so much worse if Obama has a chance to implement his, to quote the brilliant Tony Blankley, "scarcity-driven economic policies." The fear is that people anxious for change will ignore the ramifications of such policies. I'm thinking many of the people who post on this blog are, at this moment, swept up in the 'change is good' mantra of Obama but they will be a lot less excited when they have to pull their kids out of private school and take out loans to pay their taxes.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Are there millions of homeless people?

[Maxiesid]

What is REALLY loud and clear here is your statement, "Obama talks a lot about how he would spend our tax money, but he doesn't address the issue of how to keep America profitable. The answer is not to pull troops out of Iraq" So, you view the killing and maiming of thousands of our military members as just a part of a plan to keep America profitable? You think all those Iraqis we have slaughtered, men, women, children babies...that is okay because it is all part of a business plan to keep the profits rolling in for corporate America? It seems like every time a GOP supporter opens their mouth they say some of the most hideous things imaginable, and think it is perfectly fine and resonable. It really is time for change in this country and it can't begin too soon.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Well, the war has actually become a drain on the US economy. One of several promised things that has not happened is the US presence in Iraq being funded by Iraqi oil revenues.

[brighterside]

I don't know where you get this idea that Obama will raise taxes. I think he will do the contrary. His the only president that calls for a tax break for the middle class. I know that McCain's economy policy is the same as Bush's meaning more tax breaks for the rich and overtaxing the poor and middle class.

I also like Obama's ideas of removing tax breaks for corporations that ship their jobs overseas. This is the reason why China has such an unfair trade balance against us. Thanks to Bush and his cronies, a lot of us are without jobs because of him.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

I think we will see in a few weeks, with Obama's economic policy tour, that this will be quite popular.

>I also like Obama's ideas of removing tax breaks for corporations that ship their jobs overseas. This is the reason why China has such an unfair trade balance against us. Thanks to Bush and his cronies, a lot of us are without jobs because of him.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

I think he will raise some taxes, on some people.

[BatMasterson2]

" you can fool some of the people all of the time".......
McBush / 08

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Well, every politician ever invented thinks THAT ... :)

[DRaymond]

The problem is that if he really strikes out as such a maverick then where does that leave the rest of the party? Do they ALL think that they can suddenly become mavericks?

The other thing that McCain is trying to do is to turn a clever quip from Reagan's debate "My opponent's youth and inexperience" into a campaign refrain. Along with all the lame takeoffs of Obama slogans it really shows how hard they are searching for an idea.

But McCain's 'experience' frame is a tricky challenge for Obama because he can't counter it on his own. Obama saying 'sure I have the experience' won't wash. What he needs to do is engage as proxies the Greyhairs of the Democratic Party: Biden, Carter, George Mitchell, Robert Byrd, Madeline Albright, Warren Cristopher. Folks that make McCain look like the johnny-come-lately. Have them all come out and say that what the young man wants to do is spot-on. Obama should arrange consultation meetings with accompanying photo ops to show that the young whippersnapper respects his elders and that the Obama White House will have no shortage of highly regarded sage advice.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

The Republican congressional leaders are hoping for some sort of McCain miracle.

>The problem is that if he really strikes out as such a maverick then where does that leave the rest of the party? Do they ALL think that they can suddenly become mavericks?

[SanityClaus]

I used to wonder why, if the Republicans are the party of corporate America, they are so effing terrible at marketing themselves.

But I think they're only the party of that subset of corporate America that profits at the public trough, like Halliburton, and those folks have no idea how to sell something to anyone except by bribing politicians.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Marketing is not just about putting out slick press releases, cool soundbites, etc. It's about promoting a good product. If people don't like the product, in the end they will not buy it, no matter how slick the PR and advertising.

>I used to wonder why, if the Republicans are the party of corporate America, they are so effing terrible at marketing themselves.

[SanityClaus]

Thanks for responding. I really appreciate it when HuffPo contributors roll up their sleeves and engage directly with us. And I concur that it starts and ends with a good product.

[DietrichMoody]

McCains real conundrum is that he should have ran as an Independent. Why didn't he leave the party? Why didn't he do what Lieberman did, if he was so, Mavericky? Right now, we need to seperate him from the celebrity.

[seeblue]

DietrichMoody, I apologize that this is off-topic, but I had a wonderful English teacher 38 years ago...If you can remember that "a rat" runs through "separate," you will never misspell it "seperate" again. By the way, I do agree with your post, good point.

[DietrichMoody]

way off topic.....sorry I have a broen hand...but as long as you understood my point....well to me, thats all that matters...­..........­.........
(notice I made 10 periods)

[DietrichMoody]

McCains real conundrum is that he should have ran as an Independent. Why didn't he leave the party? Why didn't he do what Lieberman did, if he was so, Mavericky? Right now, we need to seperate him from the celebrity.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

McCain isn't a good enough fundraiser to run as an independent, and has a minuscule Internet presence.

>I used to wonder why, if the Republicans are the party of corporate America, they are so effing terrible at marketing themselves.

[vfx]

"Bush has a near record low approval rating. "
Is that right? I thought he broke through that "near" glass floor a long time ago.

McCain's overall moves are right but it's the minutia like talking and staging that is pathetic. Rove is probably in charge of the former and let's hope they keep the crew helping John with the latter.

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

I thought so, too, but he's still above Truman.

>"Bush has a near record low approval rating. "
Is that right? I thought he broke through that "near" glass floor a long time ago.

[BlueOnBlue]

McCain's "maverick" image is almost totally undeserved. A look at his voting record shows he votes with his party a huge proportion of the time, only straying when he is within sight of a presidential bid.

Before 2000, his voting record earned him ratings from right wing groups which put him among the most conservative Senators. He dropped a few places as he approached the 2000 election and then went back up again afterwards. Again last year, he tempered some of his votes, most famously bucking the party (but supporting the president) on immigration reform.

He's also a long-time neoconservative, backing an interventionist foreign policy well before the Bush administration.

He's straight line conservative on abortion ,family planning, and most other social issues. He gets consistently low marks from women's groups.

What he does, though, is skillfully manipulate the press, including apparently the author of this blog, into thinking of him as a "maverick."

[William Bradley - Huffpost Blogger]

Don't confuse being a sometime interventionist -- and McCain only backs intervention about half the time -- with being a neoconservative. (A terribly overused phrase, in the view of someone who knows real neocons.)

The real neocons have never particularly liked him. Their preferred candidates in this race were Giuliani and Thompson and Romney.

>He's also a long-time neoconservative, backing an interventionist foreign policy well before the Bush administration.