RALF SEIFFE |
Chicago Columnist Illinois Leader Political Strategist Analyst Business Advisor Entrepreneur Chicago Illinois Review |
|
|
|
SEIFFE: A Radical Suggestion For McCainMonday, July 7, 2008 By Ralf Seiffe Obama’s “blank canvas” description of himself is designed to reflect the observer’s own hopes and prejudices and, as a campaign strategy, it’s brilliant. It works in the same way a good conversationalist steers a discussion to the other person’s interests and listens. This tactic is appropriate for vapid cocktail parties but to strategically deflect any serious examination of a presidential candidate’s views is an intentional fraud on the voters. Obama’s fundamental strategy is reasonable cause for suspicion of political conspiracy. The presumptive Democrat nominee has recently shown his elasticity on several core principles. Apparently, he’s abandoned these fundamental values--and the sentiments of his far-left supporters--to camouflage his real views to a larger segment of voters that hasn’t yet started to pay attention to the race. It is a mercenary approach to win the office at any personal price. Obama’s candidacy of reflected views and plastic values thereby leads to the reasonable conclusion that he is more concerned with power than with his mantra of “change.” If he’s elected, what expectation should we have that he would govern any differently than he has campaigned? If elected, Obama will revert to his now hidden, core values which include the concept of a “living Constitution.” In office, Obama will perceive the Supreme Court--and the inferior courts generally-- as an impediment to his agenda, just as every liberal has since FDR tried to pack the Court in the late 1930’s. Recognize that Justice Kennedy is inscrutable and that Justices Thomas, Scalia, Roberts and Alito are mortal. That means any nomination President Obama would make would either replace one of the Court’s liberals with another or, if a conservative would die or resign, make nominations that would ratchet the Court leftward. John McCain has promised to name originalist judges so, in contrast to Obama, it’s important that he wins. That means convincing the base to shake off their indifference and become engaged in the 2008 contest and frankly, there are several fundamental changes the Arizona senator could make that would help. These include immigration, education, and free speech issues as well as liberty as a basic governing concept. But the most important change McCain could announce that he will serve only one term. This announcement should be accompanied by three or four truly ambitious goals he would promise to pursue as President. My choice for these missions would be to massively increase domestic energy production, to restructure our tax system to make it competitive with the rest of the world and to take on the Congress’ profligate ways. Together, these announcements would have two primary benefits. The first would be to draw a distinction against Obama. By foreclosing another term, maverick candidate McCain could make the claim he will take on America’s real problems without regard to the politics of reelection He, rather than Obama is the candidate of real change. He could position his half-century’s service to the nation against 143 days experience as a U.S. Senator before Obama announced his campaign. He can claim insight that is simply not available to a candidate who’s resume mostly reports an indifferent career as a provincial State Senator with unanswered ethical complications. A one-term strategy would also position McCain as the realist with a limited, comprehendible and positive agenda, ala Reagan. That is important because McCain is not an inspired campaigner so he needs a limited message he can easily communicate with voters. Given the bankroll Obama will have, it is important that McCain’s message be easily understood and that it stands up to the onslaught of advertising the Democrats will likely spend this fall. Conventional wisdom would say that announcing a one-term promise would make him a lame duck on the first day of his presidency. Without an electrifying statement that captures the imagination of the electorate however, there will be no first day in office. This strategy would also provide some collateral benefits that would prove useful in the campaign. The first addresses his age. By offering to serve only one term, McCain would show judgment that could instantly turn this potential liability into a virtue. There is a reason to worry if he would have the energy and the composure to serve in the world’s most stressful job for two terms. Older people know this might be less interested in a two-term McCain but would be willing to bet on four years. Given their high index of voting, this would be an important victory. Another would be to magnify the importance of the choice of a running mate. There would be no better way to excite the base by picking someone acceptable to them and instantly making them the front-runner in 2012. This long, “break-in” period would allow expanding the field beyond the likely picks we saw in the primary to younger choices who would then be ready for an Obama re-run in 2012. This puts up-and-comers like Governors Bobby Jindal or even Sarah Palin of Alaska in play. Another benefit is that it would serve notice on Congress that he would be willing to battle them. Without the burden of maintaining popularity ratings, McCain would be positioned to vilify Congress and accurately accuse them of being an impediment to progress. Voters who prefer divided government might prefer Mccain as they regard a Democrat tsunami in the fall. Perhaps the biggest collateral advantage would be to re-vivify Hillary Clinton. Her supporters are already torn between Obama and McCain so if McCain were to serve only four years, Hillary would still be relevant at the end of his term--especially if Obama had already been defeated in 2008. Hillary’s disappointed supporters would have a powerful reason to vote for a McCain promising one term. A politician pledging a single term would be so unexpected that it would become a concrete symbol of change that voters would understand. If McCain made his promise credible, he would keenly illustrate the difference between a genuine American hero spending his twilight serving the nation with an inexperienced, lean and hungry socialist from the political cesspool of Chicago. That might be just enough to redefine McCain as the candidate of real change and turn this campaign around.Ralf Seiffe advises business start-ups and product launches from Chicago, Illinois and is a political analyst and columnist for the Illinois Leader and Illinois Review. Webmaster Contact: Alynn Patzer alynn11111@aol.com
|
|||