2008 February 10 Sunday
Bush And McCain Ally On Iraq And Immigration

George W. Bush's ideal successor is now slated to become the Republican nominee for President in 2008 and Bush is working to line up conservative support for McCain.

In the same hotel ballroom where conservative activists greeted John McCain with a mix of cheers and boos just 16 hours earlier, President Bush tried to calm his party's base yesterday. Without naming McCain, Bush assured the group that the eventual Republican nominee will "carry a conservative banner" to the White House.

Eight years after they battled it out for the presidency, Bush and McCain find their fates linked again by history, but this time they are on the same side. With McCain virtually guaranteed the Republican nomination to succeed Bush, they head together into a general election campaign depending on each other. McCain needs the president to help reunite their splintered party, and Bush needs the senator from Arizona to validate his presidency and carry forth its strategy in Iraq.

Bush gets double bonus points with a McCain nomination: Iraq and immigration amnesty. McCain wants to keep fighting in Iraq and McCain has tried very hard to get immigration amnesty passed. Even now McCain has only backed off on immigration to the point of saying that border enforcement comes before amnesty. But McCain and Bush just want to make it easier for Hispanics to enter legally. They are not for immigration restriction. They are for immigration increases.

We are approaching my nightmare scenario: John McCain versus Barack Obama. Who is worse?

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2008 February 10 11:26 AM  Politics American Presidency

Bob Badour said at February 10, 2008 1:09 PM:

If the Democrats have any intelligent people among them, they will nominate Clinton. McCain has no chance to defeat Clinton. Clinton will even attract some Republican votes from people who don't want the Republican Party to take the blame for immigration amnesty and other lunatic liberal policies.

Obama, on the other hand, will scare those Republicans back to voting Republican. It's at least conceivable for McCain to beat Obama. It's not conceivable for McCain to beat Clinton.

But in any case, the presidency has already been lost. Who is running for Congress and/or the Senate in your area? What is the incumbent's record on immigration? Who needs to be punished at the polling booth?

Alex said at February 10, 2008 8:53 PM:

Gotta go with Barack (and I'm one who feels that Hillary would be less dangerous than McCain, for reasons you've stated in other posts). As bad as McCain is, I think an Obama presidency--even an Obama nomination, I'm afraid--would drive the Left crazy in a kind of JFK/RFK-worship way except amplified immeasurably through the power of race. To oppose him would be racism. The Right would be screwed indefinitely.

pjgoober said at February 11, 2008 9:21 AM:

As a candidate in isolation, Barrack is worse. Strategically, I agree with Randall that McCain is worse, because I think that America's last hope for not becoming a third world country is the republicans becoming a far more immigration restrictionist party. McCain needs to lose to help that along.

Randall Parker said at February 11, 2008 6:08 PM:

pjgoober, Alex,

A win by either Democrat has upsides. It could put the Republicans back in control of the House in 2010.

Obama would make an especially interesting episode. He can sound all up and optimistic on the campaign trail. But ruling is so much harder and the ruling period lasts much longer. The left-down for the Left for what comes from real rule would be great to watch. Though Bill Clinton did an excellent job of giving his supporters lots of micro-policies that made them thing they were getting a big entree when they were really getting the low-cal version.

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright