McCain's Crapshoot
Dear Stumped:
What's the most important thing that people don't know about John McCain?
Alex Casillas
Dear Alex:
The answer is John McCain's penchant for gambling, although after his pick Friday of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, people will gain more of an appreciation for this McCain character trait.
McCain loves to play craps, and his choice of running mate is the ultimate rolling of the dice. I have no idea what the dynamics of the decision were, but you can imagine all those discipline-imposing advisers imported from past Bush campaigns grating on McCain's nerves. Presumably they pushed safe VP picks, just as they have been trying to get McCain to stick to a message-of-the-day programming.
But McCain is too reckless, as a gambler, to run a cautious campaign. And because party pollsters may have seen the handwriting on the wall -- a state-by-state analysis is a lot more ominous for GOP than those seemingly close national polls -- those around him may be willing to humor McCain's gambling streak.
Watching Sarah Palin take to the podium in Dayton for her national unveiling was one of those breathtaking moments. Is he really doing this?! It was like being at a craps table in Vegas at 2 a.m., standing next to someone tossing out black ($100) chips on "yo-eleven" -- the ultimate all-or-nothing bet that eleven will be the next number rolled.
I suspect that even when gambling, McCain would have little patience for grinding out a whole night sticking only to safer "pass" bets or sixes and eights. The senator's actual approach to craps would make for a fascinating profile, if only he were willing to take a weekend off from the campaign trail to hang out with me at the Bellagio. (On The Washington Post's dime, of course.) Alas, Time has reported that McCain's aides, fearing a PR disaster, no longer allow him to gamble in a casino. (Time also noted that Obama is more of a poker player.)
A lot of the more aggressive gambling you see in a casino takes place with house money -- money recently won -- and no doubt there is an element of this in McCain's bravado. If this is 2 a.m. in the casino and McCain has an imposing row of chips in front of him, he was nearly broke "hours" ago, when he'd fallen well behind other GOP contenders.
There will be plenty of time to assess Palin's candidacy on the (slim) merits, but on Day 1, watching this likable woman introduce herself to the nation, I have a grudging respect for the magnitude of McCain's gamble.
Standing there next to the guy betting the "yo-eleven," you know it's not supposed to work. Except, hey, he has that mischievous grin, and, well, do you ever really know?
Dear Stumped:
What is it with all this talk about the Senate being unable to get anything done unless there is a "filibuster-proof" majority? Why doesn't Harry Reid call the Republicans' bluff and let them actually filibuster, forcing them to talk until they can't talk anymore, then finally bring the delayed legislation up for a vote?
P. Sean Bramble
Dazaifu, Japan
Dear Sean:
Whether the Democrats gain a "filibuster-proof" majority in the Senate will be a crucial question on Nov. 4, especially if Barack Obama wins the presidency. Contrary to your suggestion, overcoming a filibuster is no easy matter, as plenty of judicial nominees enthusiastically pushed by President Bush when the GOP controlled the Senate will tell you.
The Senate's filibuster is an anti-democratic, extra-constitutional cancer, a procedural tool perfected by Southern Dixiecrats intent on holding back the march of history. There are checks and balances carefully crafted into the design of our national government (the existence of the Senate being Exhibit A) that serve as brakes to the will of the majority; the filibuster goes too far in empowering a minority to thwart majority rule.
The filibuster is also one of those great barometers of unprincipled Washington hypocrisy. People should have a view on the proper structure of government and law, and this view shouldn't alter tactically overnight depending on whose team is in the majority. I know, I know, that's naïve...
Liberals have traditionally railed against the Senate filibuster, and rightly so. But when Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist flirted with the idea of trying to "nuke" the Senate filibuster four years ago, Democrats and liberal advocacy groups and the liberal blogosphere held up the filibuster alongside the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights as a primary source of our most cherished individual rights.
If the Democrats end up with a 58- or 59-member majority in the Senate, it will be amusing or depressing (depending on your outlook on life and the seriousness with which you approach politics) to watch the Democrats, and their allies, revert to railing against the filibuster as an obstacle to progress. It will be no less amusing/depressing to watch Republicans, much like Democrats earlier this decade, suddenly rediscover the freedom-nurturing aspects of this procedure they were so eager to nuke when it stood in their way.
By Andres Martinez |
August 30, 2008; 12:00 AM ET
Previous: Can Affluent Politicians Ever Relate? |
Next: Does McCain Have a Conflict of Interest?
Posted by: Frank Palmer | September 5, 2008 12:50 PM
this was not a gamble it was just a poor and reckless choice....their are a lot of republican women with more experience that should have been picked, but mccain went with a gimmick instead of putting country first...
Posted by: bitter independent | September 1, 2008 4:38 AM
A couple of comments are needed here:
1. McCain's Decision-making process should be questioned. Can the USA survive another 4 (8?) years with a President who shoots first and asks questions later?
Here is what McCain says about his own decision-making process in the 2002 book “Worth the Fighting For” which he co-wrote with Mark Salter:
“I make them (decisions) as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can,” ...furthermore... “Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.”
McCain's actions since choosing Palin are already indicative of somebody who is dealing with a bad case of "buyer's remorse" over his recent VP decision.
2. Palin is strongly against abortion under *any* circumstances. Good for her, what does that mean to the rest of us women in the USA? Some of us disagree with her on that subject.
SICK CHILDREN AND HEALTH CARE
Palin has a four-month old baby with Down's Syndrome, her 5th child. Maybe God is telling Palin to stop having babies. Maybe Palin should take a class in birth control, whoops those are now illegal. With today's medical advances, Down's Syndrome can be detected in the first trimester.
Not all women who have a sick child are able to afford health care for the baby the way that Palin can afford health care for her sick baby. Not all women who have sick children are married to a guy with a fleet of fishing boats who can support her. Not all women who have a sick child are Governor of a State in the United States that pays for her health care.
For those of us who don't have wonderful health care and enough $$ for a nanny as Palin does, having a sick child is serious business. It means not being able to pay the bills. Home foreclosure. Bankruptcy. Under the Bush/McCain health care proposal a woman caring for a sick baby ends up sleeping on the street, looking for handouts and has no health care options for the sick child.
No woman wants to have an abortion, it should be a *last* option. But, it *SHOULD BE* an option.
PALIN AND RAPE
Palin has publicly stated that even if her own daughter were raped she would want her daughter to have the baby. Ah, ok. Every woman in the US is not Palin's daughter. Personally, I wouldn't have the baby. Palin and McCain would make that type of abortion a criminal offense and have the raped woman be arrested for an illegal abortion. Think about that, the victim becomes the criminal under the new Bush/McCain/Palin administration.
Posted by: Phaire Pleigh | August 31, 2008 6:28 PM
For me as an educated Republican, I was happy to learn McCain spent a few hours with her for the first time before announcing that Bush had selected her as his running mate. It was a proud moment for me to see McCain following commands so, so, Maverickly…My son said in his last letter to me from Iraq – RESPECT. And that’s what I have for McCain.
And seriously who can argue with me? Just look at the last 8 years. DAMN good years to be an American. Hey I might not be able to afford going to the hospital BUT AT LEAT I HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE IN DEBT! Now where ELSE can you say THAT? And I am comfortable knowing that with McCain at the helm I would be guaranteed that for another four years. So I’m staying with what I know!
Thank goodness Palin is pro-life – because I believe its better to save them in the womb and send them off by the thousands to be murdered for our freedom from that big tyrant Iraq.
Passion? Who needs passion in politics? Them Democrats with the silly idea that there is anything to hope for, and believing in unity. Just stay off my yard is all I’m sayin.
McCain = Familiar Pain 08!
Posted by: Ronald V | August 30, 2008 11:58 PM
Dear Stumped: maybe you would have less "grudging respect" for McCain's Palin gamble if you had a brother in the Reserves and a young son and daughter of Draft ages.
The breezy attitude of too many in the Media toward McCain and his faults is getting to be disgusting.
Posted by: Louise | August 30, 2008 10:57 PM
Playing craps? Rash, reckless decisions? Is that what we can expect from McCain as president? That makes me feel very uncomfortable indeed.
Posted by: m | August 30, 2008 7:06 PM
"Sarah Palin was born in the U.S.A, and is authentically American in her values."
Same for Obama. McCain, on the other hand, was born in Panama.
Posted by: tom | August 30, 2008 6:30 PM
I wonder why the headline says "McCain's Gambling Problem"? But I guess that's okay because if people are going to read the headline, they're going to read the article. Right?
Posted by: waterfrontproperty | August 30, 2008 6:23 PM
With McCain's choice of Palin, he lays bare exactly what kind of president he will be, a shallow and frighteningly clueless leader, with a penchant for taking big risks. Palin herself, by accepting the job, seems to mirror those traits.
It's hard to imagine that the Republicans would nominate someone with all of the worst character traits of George Bush and then some, but it seems as though they have.
Posted by: Amy | August 30, 2008 6:19 PM
Sarah Palin was born in the U.S.A, and is authentically American in her values. Sorry if that hurts you free will lovers,and open-borders afficianados. Please allow her to run for political office without lobbing stink bombs at her because of "thick ankles", "husband who wanders", and such nonsense as Hillary had done to her. She'll make an excellent Veep.
Posted by: zaney8 | August 30, 2008 5:49 PM
McCain gambled and he lost bigtime...one poster on another log stated do we want to leave the second in command in the hands of McCain's choice or Biden....
This choice was pivotal in garnering votes, women or otherwise...This decision may well have tipped the scales in OBama's favor...
Posted by: Ron-Va | August 30, 2008 5:05 PM
Obama prefers poker. Big surprise. Poker demands intelligence and thinking just isn't McCain's cup of tea.
Posted by: John in Chicago | August 30, 2008 3:36 PM
Once more the smallness of the democratic supporters come to the fore. I am sure none of you hypocrites have ever gone to Vegas and gambled. The more you send out your crap the more determined those who support McCain will work. How about a few lines on Obama's crooked friends in Chicago? His mortgage on his house.it must be nice to be perfect like the democrats.
Posted by: musing | August 30, 2008 3:25 PM
Its all a crap shoot.
Obama's "change" campaign goes with Biden. Now, when i think of "change", Biden isn't the first name that comes slamming into my head.
Hillary Clinton had 18 million votes in the Democratic Primary!!! Biden had a couple thousand votes. Who's shooting craps?
Seriously folks, Galin probably knows more about domestic oil and natural gas production than the other 3 candidates combined. Isn't energy one of the biggest factors in our economy? Obama is already looking into offshore drilling. Who's shooting craps?
Galin doesn't have much experience but she's the VP. Obama doesn't have experience yet he's going for President. Where's the crap shoot??
Richard Morse
Posted by: Richard Morse | August 30, 2008 2:30 PM
---PLAY CRAPS IN VEGAS OLD MAN, NOT WITH YOUR COUNTRY's FUTURE!!!!!
---Ummm, WHAT EXACTLY is it that a VP does again"?!!!
This is a MUST WATCH VIDEO CLIP of Sarah Palin--it will answer ALL QUESTIONS!!
Posted by: Anonymous | August 30, 2008 2:25 PM
When I saw the introduction of Sarah Palin on television, a fleeting memory of old, old Florida orange juice commercials immediately crossed the back of my mind.
Then I pinned it down. Anita Bryant! Ex-beauty-queen ... fundamentalist ... homophobic ... tons of hair-spray ... Does anybody else remember her?
Now that I've made the connection, I've decided to be afraid, very afraid, of Sarah Palin. That perky cheer-leader cockiness can be visually, and hence emotionally, quite appealing.
Here's another connection. My local PBS station still broadcasts the Lawrence Welk show. (Yes, Welk died sixteen years ago, in 1992, aged 89.) Sarah Palin seems to have the same, insanely cheerful impermeability as Lawrence Welk dancers gyrating in their mad polkas.
I'm not sure what can get through to women like this. Certainly not the realities of most of USA 2008.
Posted by: PenKuhn | August 30, 2008 2:13 PM
I've played craps. It has an optimum strategy that gives you the best chances of any house game...but are still negative and bound to lose over the long run. It is also completely automatic and thus rather boring.
But I gather McCain likes excitement, so will bet on 11 even though the odds are 17 to 1 against and the payoff is only 15-1.
With this roll, he is not playing with house money (or even Cindy's), he is playing with mine...and with my life and my grand-daughter's future. Wildly, recklessly irresponsible, I say.
Kind of reminds me of Bill Bennett and his slot-machines.
BTW it is said that Obama is an excellent poker player. That's a game where you play the people, not the cards, need steady nerves, patience, and perseverance and, as a pro once told me, tests above all your character. And it is much more like real life than chess (which I play better than poker, although neither really well) because chess has (theoretically) complete information whereas in poker the unexpected is always to be expected. McCain has made a sucker bet, and I fervently hope that we do not have to pay the vig for him.
Posted by: jrosen | August 30, 2008 2:11 PM
We elect teams to the Presidency - Cabinets an everyone in the EOB and many people to do the detailed work of government. When a President is replaced in mid term, the team stays in place and the VP (who is briefed every day) moves in. Experience is not as important as intelligence, energy and honesty. You are just as honest the first day at work as you should be on the last day. It is not a factor enhanced by experience. That is why Senator Obama could be a good President, given the right team. And VP Palin, too. She will be ready to serve. Senator McCain picked a good person.
Posted by: Gary E. Masters | August 30, 2008 2:01 PM
Games People Play
You may be on to something here. For years we were told that those from the USA were "brash poker players" while the Soviets were cautions and intelligent chess players. We would lose in the long run.
However, our poker players did alright.
Posted by: Gary E. Masters | August 30, 2008 1:55 PM
Palin laughs and giggles as a fellow GOP congresswoman from her hometown, a CANCER SURVIVOR, is ridiculed as being "a cancer" by a radio show host. And yes, Palin knew about her illness.
Is this is the kind of woman you want a heart beat away from the presidency of the United States?
That's Palin's character and integrity for you. Right there.
Posted by: LH | August 30, 2008 1:42 PM
Sometimes Stumped hits answers out of the park and brings all bases home. Andres has done it here, deftly combining insights on human nature with knowledge of our government.
My take on Gov. Palin is we're lucky she doesn't have more experience. Cheney's 40 years of executive work, including 35 with US presidents, enabled him to remake the White House into its own dark planet.
Even as the American economy tanks, Cheney's Haliburton stock options have risen over 4000 per cent. The printable version of his opinion of voters wanting out of Iraq is reportedly: "So?"
POTUS experience is a red state herring. Even GOP admits we're electing policies and values not people.
When conservatives claim ALL American values are good and liberals lack them, it's hyperbole rooted in telling truth: Slavery, no votes for women, every child for him or herself, Jim Crow laws were all, in their day, American values until liberals persuaded America to let them go.
Dems aim to let go of values, inhumane and utterly useless, which have only served to enforce privilege as an entitlement for those who defer to a traditional self-image.
Dems aim to hold fast only to the best values of our founders, including some currently trashed by the Repubs that Dems are pledged to restore.
Never have the stakes been more clearly marked. In November, please vote.
Posted by: jhbyer | August 30, 2008 12:26 PM
Another bad day for the Baracky Hussein Obama campaign.
Every single day, he sounds more and more like a Republican. Saying anything that he thinks will gain him votes – he is a poll watcher with no convictions.
Baracky Hussein Obama has an extremely liberal voting record – he cannot run and hide from that fact.
Even his running mate and Hillary Clinton have stated, that he is not qualified to be President.
I hope that all Hispanic voters realize, that they will be at the bottom of the barrel if Baracky Hussein Obama is elected.
Baracky Hussein Obama will have to pacify the Black voters, after receiving 99 % of their vote in November.
Democrats for John McCain in 2008 – The Maverick is back.
Posted by: gary | August 30, 2008 12:15 PM
I find it ugly and offensive that a party and candidate that has railed for a generation against affirmative action -- which they define as employing the lesser qualified over the better qualified on racial or gender terms -- would rally behind a VP choice who's only qualification is her sex. If this had occured in any other business or situation, those employees passed over for this job would have serious grounds for a law suit. But what can you expect from a party that defines the word hypocrcy?
Two, final words -- Clarence Thomas.
Posted by: Lost In Texas | August 30, 2008 12:10 PM
Who is Sarah Palin? I say she is the veep version of George Bush.
Both were governors with no interest in foreign policy. Just like George was, she is a tabula rasa that will be written on by whoever gets closest to her.
Both Sarah and George are conservative Christians and anti-science. But, George did not seem as hard-core as Sarah. Sarah seems to be the true believer, the happy warrior. Is it true she believes the earth was created less than 10,000 years ago?
George was always considered charming, even if he doesn't wear well. Sarah also seems charming.
George had an old angry hawk as a running mate. Sarah also has an old hawk as a running mate. And there are rumors that Sarah's running mate also has a bad temper.
Posted by: Robert | August 30, 2008 12:02 PM
Salman has it right. How completely cynical of McCain to choose someone whose brief governmental "experience" is more akin to being high school student body president or chairperson of the village bake sale than to serious governing. What nerve McCain has to claim that Obama puts politics ahead of country! His selection of this woman is the most blatant example of his goal of winning at any cost -- and the country pays the price. And how appropriate that McCain's favorite game is CRAPS.
Posted by: bwallace2 | August 30, 2008 11:53 AM
McCain/Palin ROADKILL '08
Posted by: patriot76 | August 30, 2008 11:12 AM
McCain/Palin ROADKILL '08
Posted by: patriot76 | August 30, 2008 11:11 AM
Great analysis by Stumped. First time that I've read the column. Regardless of party affiliation I think this is right one.
Posted by: Jesse McCoy | August 30, 2008 9:54 AM
Palin doesn't believe in evolution, she wants creationism taught in the public schools. She doesn't think we are causing global warming, so there is little we can do about it. She opposes abortion even in the case of rape, incest or threat to the mothers life.
In reality, she's another science denying extremist from the lunatic fringe of American politics.
Arguments about "experience" are moot, it's just another talking point run amok. The only people who have experience being President are ex-presidents. The rest is partisan fluffing.
If we look at the daily tracking polls we see over the course of the 3 days of the Dem convention Obama gained 5 points. He spoke on the 4th day, so we (who don't buy the daily polls) will have to wait another day or two until we see what impact it had but by all accounts he's probably about 10 pts in front of McCain right now with an intimidating lead in the electoral college.
Palin may move the polls a bit, but she lacks a national constituency. If she has an impact (and VPs' rarely do) it will be felt over time as people get to know her.
The next test is the Rep convention. If McCain doesn't make significant inroads in the independent voters before they adjourn, the Republicans are going to have a very hard time even getting close.
Posted by: dijetlo | August 30, 2008 8:43 AM
If the 60 million Independent voters of the USA were actually represented in the Congress, a filibuster would be meaningless because neither the neolibs or neocons there could get enough votes for their earmarks or lobbyist slide-ins, which have over the last 30 years wasted (not spent, wasted) eleven trillion dollars of Independent voter's dollars.
As for McCain's 'crapshooting', every time he did a bank turn in a Phantom F4, he was crapshooting. Could be habitual, but does his selection of Gov. Palin mean he wants a reformer to watch the home fires (she would be President of the Senate) while he deals with international problems? On the other hand, would Independents want a president who deals with economic problems while a savvy vice president looked after some of the international problems? Unlike the neolibs and neocons, the Independents would like to see a vice president with a real job, preferably one that puts a lid on waste, domestic or international.
Posted by: indeparty | August 30, 2008 8:38 AM
I always like telling the story of walking through the Bellagio in Las Vegas in 2004 and seeing John McCain at the craps table. It was a shock but like a lot of senior citizens, they like to gamble in their golden years.
Posted by: Dogshop | August 30, 2008 8:23 AM
Putin, Adhamedijad, Osama, Zawahiri, Chavez, China would not hesitate to test Palin with a major security situation if McCain died or was sick in the hospital, incapacitated. Maybe she'd be fine, maybe not. But the point is that they would test her, on many fronts immediately. Obama and Biden might not do as well as Palin would, or maybe they'd do better in a multi-pronged national security/economic attack on the US. But our enemies would be much more hesitant to test their mettle, than they would Palin's
Posted by: Anonymous | August 30, 2008 8:20 AM
Oh, and Democrats, as far as Palin's "lack of experience" is concerned, tell me that after you can explain why you have nominated someone for President who is two years out of his own state legislature, and who has never given the country anything more than a few cute speeches.
Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 30, 2008 7:21 AM
The filibuster may be the only thing between a very liberal Pres. Obama, allied with leftist House Majority Leader Pelosi, and disaster. If McCain loses, which seems the most likely outcome at this point, God help us all without the filibuster to protect us from "Dems Gone Wild".
Posted by: dyinglikeflies | August 30, 2008 7:18 AM
There is unbelieveable hyprocacy here. McCain promised us theat his pick for VP would be someone ready to be president. This is after assiling Obama (an effective US senator, 12 year menber of the Illionos legislature and a law school professor who has traveled wxtensively throught the worls) for not being ready to lead. Instread, he picks someobe exceptionally unqualified. This is an insult not only to the many thousands of better prepared women but to the countru as a whole. Simply compare the picks Biden and Palen and who is more redy to step into the presidency. McCain has rvealed himself as incompetent to lead.
Posted by: GB99 | August 30, 2008 7:14 AM
A 72 year old,multiple cancer survivor who has a very bright chance of becoming our next president, just named a person who was,till 2 years ago,a mayor of a remote town in Alaska where the major stretegic desicion each year was whether there is enough snow for the dog sledge race.my god,how can we be so blind, and how can you be so naive.its not gambling,its reckless endangerment of my country!!!!
and anyone who talks about executive experience,my friends Alaska is a remote state where there are no strategic desicons to be made.the first time our potential VP got her passport,in her lifetime,was about 14 months ago when she travelled,FIRST time outside the USA to visit alaska national guard in kuwait.
wake up,its not about right or left,blue or red,its about the country we love.what will happen if God forbid a president Mccain becomes incapacitated after a few months in office!!!
just think,and PUT COUNTRY FIRST
and Andre its hard for me to believe that you are just labeling it as some cute,harmless gambling,my god how can you be so naive???
Posted by: Salman | August 30, 2008 4:35 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.











"Crapshoot" is a great metaphor for the Palin pick.
It shows how McCain would make decisions if he ever got in the White House.
But in Vegas you can only lose what you bring to the table, and you can -- but probably won't -- win much more.
The country can only win so much by gambles; it can lose everything we have nad everything we are.