Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

What Does the Romney Endorsement Mean?

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney will endorse John McCain's bid for the Republican presidential nomination this afternoon, a move that could well bring a formal end to the fight for the GOP nod.

During the course of the campaign, Romney emerged as McCain's main rival for the nomination, running a well-funded bid (thanks to his fundraising prowess and personal wealth) that focused heavily on courting conservative voters.

Romney routinely portrayed McCain as insufficiently conservative and a creature of a broken system in Washington. McCain hit back that Romney had flip-flopped on nearly every issue of import to social conservative voters and that, as a result, he could not be trusted as the party's nominee.

Those public clashes reflected a private distaste between the two men. McCain clearly delighted in jabbing Romney, even when it was not in his political interest to do so. And even when Romney announced he was dropping from the race -- at the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this month -- he couldn't resist a throwing a bit of elbow at his one-time opponent: "I disagree with Senator McCain on a number of issues, as you know," Romney said. To be fair, Romney followed up with, "But I agree with him on doing whatever it takes to be successful in Iraq, and finding and executing Osama bin Laden."

One of the key players in brokering the Romney endorsement of McCain was John Weaver, according to informed sources. Weaver, who had long served as McCain's political capo before leaving the campaign in August, was asked by Steve Schmidt and Charlie Black -- two members of McCain's inner circle -- to call Romney campaign manager Beth Myers to argue the case for an endorsement. The two talked by phone and traded e-mails over the weekend, the first step in a process that led to today's endorsement. (Myers and Weaver go way back -- the two served as deputy campaign managers for Bill Clements's 1986 Texas gubernatorial race. Their boss in that contest? A guy named Karl Rove.)

The past disagreements between McCain and Romney are almost certain to be glossed over later this afternoon when the endorsement is made. But given the animosity between the men, why is Romney endorsing? And what does it mean for the race?

The first question is the easier to answer. Romney clearly believes he has a bright political future and wants to make sure he is seen by rank-and-file Republicans as a loyal footsoldier for the cause, not a self-centered whiner. By standing with McCain, Romney shows that the primary race is water under the bridge (even if he really doesn't believe that) and that he is putting the good of the party before his own self interest. (The move is not dissimilar to McCain's work to elect and reelect George W. Bush following his own bitter loss in 2000.) It's the first major step to a second Romney presidential bid in either 2012 or 2016.

As for its impact on the race, that question is a bit harder to answer. By the time he had dropped from the GOP contest, Romney had emerged as a conservative darling -- as evidenced by the fact that he won the CPAC straw ballot in both 2007 and 2008. In endorsing McCain, Romney is telling conservatives that their concerns about the Arizona senator's resume on issues like tax cuts, illegal immigration and campaign finance reform pale in comparison to their differences with either Democratic nominee.

How much Romney's endorsement matters to rank-and-file conservatives, many of whom have long distrusted McCain, is a harder thing to measure. Endorsements, even at this high level, are generally forgotten within a few news cycles.

The broader import of Romney's endorsement of McCain is that it squeezes even more oxygen out of the hopes of former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. Huckabee has pledged to stay in the race, despite watching the establishment of the party line up behind McCain -- from ex-Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to former Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman. With Romney now firmly behind McCain, it makes it extremely difficult for Huckabee to make the case that there remains a viable chance for him to win the nomination.

And don't forget that Huckabee very likely has ambitions to wind up on the national ticket either as McCain's vice president or with a second presidential bid of his own down the line. Romney's endorsement removes the last major excuse Huckabee had for holding out. The party is now as close to unified behind McCain as it can be, and that means Huckabee will need to decide sooner rather than later how much longer he wants to stick out what looks to be an increasingly quixotic bid for the nomination.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 14, 2008; 2:33 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Should Hillary Go Negative?
Next: Fix Pick: On Reporters and Voting

Comments

avnixh txkquje fcyb opea
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/celexa-oral-solution.html celexa oral solution

Posted by: celexa oral solution | August 21, 2008 5:20 AM | Report abuse

avnixh txkquje fcyb opea
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/celexa-oral-solution.html celexa oral solution

Posted by: celexa oral solution | August 21, 2008 5:20 AM | Report abuse

ihctoq jfhnsqg jgewtcb
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/lexapro-bipolar-disorder.html lexapro bipolar disorder

Posted by: lexapro bipolar disorder | August 21, 2008 3:34 AM | Report abuse

cxgmdwz amlefd
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/paxil-overnight-shipping.html paxil overnight shipping

Posted by: paxil overnight shipping | August 21, 2008 3:15 AM | Report abuse

abjxlq omckw ndvgsa
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/effexor-withdrawals.html effexor withdrawals

Posted by: effexor withdrawals | August 21, 2008 1:21 AM | Report abuse

otlgc ztqpcd acwqbd kbmux
http://ratetiti.fcpages.com/effexor-depression-drug.html effexor depression drug

Posted by: effexor depression drug | August 20, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

pren kgjqhdx xcjiyht
http://ticketsn.fcpages.com/rogaine-tropical-solution-ad.html rogaine tropical solution ad

Posted by: rogaine tropical solution ad | August 18, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

navmoji qoznp rqhym
http://thebunio1.exactpages.com/does-effexor-cause-elevated-glucose-levels.html does effexor cause elevated glucose levels

Posted by: does effexor cause elevated glucose levels | August 18, 2008 6:17 AM | Report abuse

nyxih ekonxbj fzlgcb bxasu
http://thebunio1.exactpages.com/wellbutrin-sr-bupropion-texas.html wellbutrin sr bupropion texas

Posted by: wellbutrin sr bupropion texas | August 18, 2008 6:08 AM | Report abuse

nyxih ekonxbj fzlgcb bxasu
http://thebunio1.exactpages.com/wellbutrin-sr-bupropion-texas.html wellbutrin sr bupropion texas

Posted by: wellbutrin sr bupropion texas | August 18, 2008 6:08 AM | Report abuse

ckli ousj edxj
http://loangov.envy.nu/buspar-prescribing-information.html buspar prescribing information

Posted by: buspar prescribing information | August 17, 2008 10:42 PM | Report abuse

kvfxay ehsdmrp zkgfj
http://doaingemanci.100freemb.com/copper-cause-hair-loss.html copper cause hair loss

Posted by: copper cause hair loss | August 17, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

ulnt npiyg wavogu rzwscn
http://knotlyri.lookseekpages.com/lexapro-sexual-isde-effects.html lexapro sexual isde effects

Posted by: lexapro sexual isde effects | August 17, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: kamagra sildenafil citrate | August 16, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: lexapro and jaw tightening | August 16, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

wlkfhxe ahfmsn nkcw
http://youngercam.00freehost.com/effexor-rx-change-in-effectiveness.html effexor rx change in effectiveness

Posted by: effexor rx change in effectiveness | August 16, 2008 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: cheap generic propecia | May 11, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: cheap generic propecia | May 11, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: hair propecia | May 11, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: hair propecia | May 11, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: ultram ingredient | May 11, 2008 5:29 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: ultram ingredient | May 11, 2008 5:29 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: online drug store ultram | May 11, 2008 1:48 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: ultram overdose | May 10, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: ultram overdose | May 10, 2008 11:41 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: buy dir ultram | May 10, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: buy dir ultram | May 10, 2008 6:52 PM | Report abuse

jshpztufm zyouwfrs msnqk sude szyuv xhousica anrkuxom http://www.ohguyqdz.rsuezxio.com

Posted by: ulnsq nwqz | April 16, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

watmk phikmodcz iroxgqdvl jhbfcpw mcqsw dzqomiw ocriy

Posted by: cejhwaitp kdyh | April 16, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

I'd rather he didn't endorse anyone, but he doesn't have a lot of choice other than telling his delegates just to go home... Obviously he wouldn't agree with McCain OR Huckabee. Better to look like a gentleman and a statesman now, to set himself up for 2012. Go to www.beatjohnmccain.com for more analysis - he says it better than I can!

Posted by: jenningstoo | February 16, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

McCain will not ask Romney to be his VP because, first, he has to always be right.

But next, and this is huge, the Evangelicals won't have it....

They'd immediately start circulating a rumor that the Mormon Church is plotting to assassinate McCain once he gets elected in order to gain world domination or something equally asinine.

I don't mean to be unkind, but they are pretty predicatable in this regard.

Even honest decent evangelicals who don't start such rumors are constantly bombarded with them, and many are eventually given to suspicion and doubt.

We see this daily on the internet with fear-mongering assertions that Obama is a Muslim and likely a terrorist, though he is neither.

Now IF McCain were to prove me wrong and DID ask Romney to be his VP, the evangelical wing would be in a real pickle -- because there would be a Mormon Assassin on the right and a Muslim Terrorist on the left.

Aaaaggghhhh! :-)

On the other hand, it is equally unlikely that McCain will pick Huckabee. Huckabee has offended and alienated people in droves. And someone has to complement McCain's weaknesses, not exacerbate them!

McCain has got to find someone competent (because he's not) and neutral (because there is so much bad blood). Maybe he will, but I think the Dems have this one wrapped up, folks.

Posted by: carolm62 | February 15, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Maybe there IS a little something to the assertion that Romney endorsed McCain because Huckabee was so maliciously determined to take him out -- to the point of showering McCain with roses and chocolates and nearly taking a cottage by the sea with him.

It was very much like an episode of Survivor, where the weak vote the strong off the island. So, maybe this is Romney's payback.

But really, had Romney not endorsed anyone it would have looked churlish, and indeed, he would not seem a team player.

I would have preferred him to endorse my preference too -- Ron Paul.

Posted by: carolm62 | February 15, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

It would make sense for McCain to choose Dick Cheney as VP.

McCain is running for a George W 3rd Term, and keeping Cheney in his power spot would help retain the continuity.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | February 15, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

I don't think McCain will choose either Romney or Huckabee as his running mate.

The # 1 criterion for VP is: can he step in and be President? And given McCain's advanced age, this is even more poignant.

McCain detests Romney. McCain is a man of principle. There is no way he will allow Romney to be just a heart beat away...

As for Hucky, well... I don't think that McCain thinks Hucky has the gravitas. Not the experience.

I think McCain will go with a Moderate-to-Conservative Republican with enough experience to be able to step in should McCain check out.

Posted by: AdrickHenry | February 15, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

I smile at how Chris likes to put words in Romney's mouth! Chris you have a lot of opinions that are just that opinions.

I doubt you nor anyone else for that matter have a clue as to what is really happening in the Romney camp. Guess On!

Posted by: manwaringjd | February 15, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse


Huckabee is running for Huckabee only, to increase his speaking engagements, an the money he gets per. Once a Preacher becomes a Politician, an has to lie, fabricate, an spend his supporters money for naught, he cannot go back to Preaching. He might be looking to get a job with MSNBC on the Morning Joe Show, which he seems to be a regular guest. McCain cannot take him on the Ticket, it would go down in flames, because McCain will win the States that Huckabee has won anyway. Besides, he doesn't need a "one liner jokster" as his VP. I hope Huckabee is successful in any thing he does, as long as its not in Government. The only reason Huckabee is still in the race, is because he gets all the free spots on most of the MSM news and cable shows. The Liberal MSM knows that he only hurts the Republicans, so they have him on. Also, as soon as he gets more delegates then Romney, he will bow out. That will be a tad late to improve his standing with the Conservatives.

Posted by: eafcat | February 15, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee/Clinton in 2008! YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN! Go Arkansas go!

Posted by: SkitheRockies | February 15, 2008 10:07 AM | Report abuse

It means McCain/Romney in 2008

and Romney/Jindal in 2012

and it means the Republicans have a crack at upsetting the left of Jimmy Carter Radicals that have hypnotized the masses Barrak Hussein Obama.

Posted by: SkitheRockies | February 15, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Social conservatives, fair tax activists and constitutionalists have been sent away from the Republican Party by this. The upper middle class "win at all costs - principles be abandoned" have decided to back McCain. The only problem is that traditional logic won't work in this election. The Democratic Primaries have energized the youth, minority and lower income voting blocks with promises of free college, free or universal healthcare and a tax code that "makes the rich pay their fair share". When I watched the Dems debate they stated that "those whose family income exceeds $75,000" should pay their fair share. News Flash - In Maryland as well as many other places a combined income of $75 to 90 K is solid middle class to borderline Lower Middle Class.
Governor Huckabee has the only Populist message that stands a chance of beating Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. Conventional politics of dirty campaigning and mudslinging attacks will hurt the Republicans this cycle and McCain will get trounced like Bob Dole.

Posted by: josephmlangford | February 15, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Mitt Romney perplexed me by continuing to "respect" the character of the man who was telling lies about him, just because he had been captured and held captive in Viet Nam. I do not understand that. A liar is a liar is a liar and no amount of time in Viet Nam can make up for the fact that McCain is a corrupt thief, member of the Keating 5, and a man who's character would lead him to cheat on his long suffering wife (while he sat in the prison camp in Viet Nam) with a drug addicted nurse, and then go on to divorce the wife and marry the nurse. That is no hero-just a man who was one of the first to get captured.

McCain is not fit to be president. God save us from the other two democrats.
Mitt just needs a judgment tune-up in the matter of hero worship.

How on earth people are flocking to Obama is probably explained by all of the fools who have flocked to the likes of revivalists of Jimmy Swaggart et al, only to be left with question marks all over their dimmed wits when they discover that outside of the circus atmospheres of their long winded speeches, these con artists are anything but capable executors of their lofty sounding plans.

I certainly do not want to spend the next few years listening to this sermon giver talking to the American public as if they were the meek at a revivalist tent meeting. But then,Americans in the present school system have not fared well, and dumb folk often do flock to these Obama/Swaggart types, so I will have to just work faster with my remote until we get nuked by one of Obama's buddies in Iran.As you read this, Arab children are being taught that their job is to destroy the infidels that live in Europe and the Americas-just like Mitt said.

I cannot help but chuckle at Hillary. It really is too funny for words.

For those of you who will vote and now regret your votes for Giuliani, Fred, etc., and cannot compromise your values and vote for McCain, I suggest that you write in Romney's name in the ballot. He may be corny with hero-worship but he was the best candidate and future president of the US. He really loves America and stands for all the values that the luckier ones of us grew up with.

Posted by: usa1citizen | February 14, 2008 10:06 PM | Report abuse

It means as a lifelong Republican since meeting and campaigning for Reagan I will actively encourage others to endure the unendurable and vote Democratic.

We must end Mac's tainted career and the threat to what has been pretty good unity up until this point.

I am so tired of my party calling me for money and yet delivering very little except their constantly saying "oh my God! oh my God what could happen???" Norm Coleman...you are on your own, as well.

Posted by: pahuber | February 14, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

OK - I reread the Army Field Manual and I certainly can see why CIA would not want to be limited by it. The Manual sets standards significantly above the minimum standards
international law would permit.

I read proud's quotes at 4:53P and I can take them at face value.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 14, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Why shouldn't Romney endorse McCain? McCain is the GOP nominee for President mathimatically. He has won. Plus, Romney loves to make Huckabee, a possible future GOP opponent for him in 2012 or 2016, look like the fool he has became in this race. I like Huckabee and all, he's a good o boy. But come on, give it up Huck. Your making yourself out to be a fool. Staying in a race that is over. Plus, this saves face for Romney making him look like he really cares about the party more than himself.

I do not believe Mitt will be McCain's VP. I still believe it will be Minn. gov. Tim Pawlenty. He's a popular & successful governor in a "purple" state. Plus, he would end what the Dems. throw at McCain over the comment that the economy isn't his strong suite. Plus, folks, consider how good a McCain/Pawlenty ticket will be for America? It truly will! 2 people that are forward thinking and are not shy on sitting down with people from both parties at the table and finding solutions to America's problems. Take the Gang of 14, for example of McCain's willingness. Now, Lyndsey Graham says it's a group, he has no dealings with gangs. ;-). Look at Pawlenty's ability to balance a budget in Minn. and he showed strong leadership when the bridge collapsed in St. Paul, bringing people of all political parties together to tackle the problem.

McCain/Pawlenty 08'!

Posted by: bryant_flier2006 | February 14, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

claudialong - "No. He said torture was okay if it was done by the CIA."

If by torture you mean waterboarding (or sensory deprivation), I wish that were the case. But alas, I think that he has been, is and continues to be quite clear on the subject. Quite honestly, as somebody that has been actually tortured in the real sense of the word, I don't think he would care about or make the distinction between what agency of the government did it.

Posted by: dave | February 14, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

CC: What Does the Romney Endorsement Mean?

Approximately 280 more delegates for McCain. That is about it. I don't think Romney supporters are going to fall any easier into line behind McCain - I know my parents, both Romney supporters, are not any more enthused over McCain. Huck is past the point of really getting anything out of continuing the race other than, as both Huck and McCain say, it keeps McCain sharp. Don't know if that is true or not but that is about it. Perhaps if they can both focus on the differences between Obama and Repubicans, that will help keep some R interest going until the Dems finally decide.

Why is Romney endorsing? You mean other than being the right thing to do? I can't think of a better reason than that.

Posted by: dave | February 14, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

Why can't Huck run for the Arkansas Senate seat in 2008?

Give Pryor some competition.

Posted by: Digital_Voter | February 14, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

In a statement, McCain said the measure goes too far in applying military standards to intelligence agencies and maintained that existing law already forbids waterboarding. "Staging a mock execution by including the misperception of drowning is a clear violation,'' he said.

"Waterboarding is illegal and should be banned" and "the agency (the C.I.A.) must adhere to existing federal law and international treaties." Mccain told a reporter.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/14/washington/14cong.html?_r=2&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxnnlx=1203025712-/o6d468+qGl7twTFtuxhBQ

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/12825

Mark, *disclaimer alert* the above are liberal bastions and their opinions that are conveniently intermingled with the truth should be regarded as such.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | February 14, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

drindle-dumb: a-ha! I found a flip-flop!

proud: no you didn't. here are the facts.

drindle-dumb: *stomps feet* no, i'm right! 'live with it'!

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 4:48 PM | Report abuse

jm917 -- great analysis

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

proud, I hope you are correct and that McC did not mean he was for waterboarding CIA detainees. CIA methods have historically included sodium pentathol which could not be used in a criminal investigation, but which certainly is not torture. CIA might employ prostitutes to get info, prosecutors and MPs typically would not.

But I need to hear McC say that he did not vote that way to endorse use of waterboarding by CIA. Do you have the source for him saying that the waterboarding of CIA detainees is illegal?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 14, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse


'The fact is that he voted against an amendment from Dianne Feinstein that would have applied Army rules for interrogation to the CIA. Hard to argue with his logic there, imo.'

No. He said torture was okay if it was done by the CIA.

Live with it.

Posted by: drindl | February 14, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

honestly does nobody see any parallels between this nominationg cycle and the 6th seaosn of the west wing?

Posted by: candylane | February 14, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

The fact is that he voted against an amendment from Dianne Feinstein that would have applied Army rules for interrogation to the CIA. Hard to argue with his logic there, imo.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | February 14, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

"After praising him endlessly on this issue since fall 2006, liberals will be left to argue that John McCain doesn't have the moral authority to determine which interrogation techniques are acceptable and not acceptable - after citing him for a year as a man who did. There's no satisfying the loony left."

Now that's a sure-fire way to win an argument -- argue both sides.

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 14, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

USMC, Let's reassess the liberal mindset: The Republican who was the moral, good guy on this issue a few days ago now has completely lost his moral authority, because he feels it may be necessary for the CIA to use stress positions, sleep deprivation, etc.

Team McCain ought not be worried about this. Every time the issue of torture/interrogation techniques is raised in the presidential campaign, when it's discussed on the nightly news and the cable networks, McCain's experiences in Vietnam will be mentioned again, and you'll see B-roll black and white footage of him being interrogated by the North Vietnamese.

After praising him endlessly on this issue since fall 2006, liberals will be left to argue that John McCain doesn't have the moral authority to determine which interrogation techniques are acceptable and not acceptable - after citing him for a year as a man who did. There's no satisfying the loony left.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | February 14, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

It means that these guys are ultimately all the same--good, old conservative Republicans. All the media talk about McCain being a moderate and a maverick who marches to his own drum lost any credibility once the Senator smelled a chance to become his party's nominee.
Just consider his once categorical stand against waterboarding and all torture--even in the interrogation of terrorists or alleged terrorists.
Yesterday, he voted against a bill banning waterboarding and other torture techniques.
See on that:
http://www.reflectivepundit.com

Posted by: bn1123 | February 14, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

The Mittster and the Huckster are maneuvering around each other (like two dogs sniffing), trying to be get in position to run for president in 2012. The working assumption here is the McCain is the GOP's sacrificial goat in 2008 and that President Obama will look like a loser by 2012--like (they hope) Jimmy Carter did in 1980. At that point they assume that some divine thunderbolt will reveal them as the Second Coming of Ronald Reagan.

What each of these gents has to calculate is whether it's best for their future chances to be a "good soldier" as McCain's (losing) VP candidate this time, or to be the loyal Republican "good loser" who falls into line a la Nixon (to Goldwater) in 1964, or to be the true-blue (excuse me: true-red) "prinipled conservative" who resists the pull of McCain's bandwagon and is proven right when Mac goes down in flames this November.

Looks like Romney has decided to play the Nixon role this time around. I doubt whether Mac will take him on as VP, nor do I think Romney really wants that either. To please the powers-that-be on the right, Mac will have to pick someone of impeccably Reaganite credentials (which will cook his independent goose).

It'll now be interesting to see how long the Rev. Huck continues his game. My guess is that he sticks it out through Texas and tries to rack up at least 40% of the die-hard right-wing vote.

Posted by: jm917 | February 14, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

The Dem Congress failed to live up to their promise of a longer work-week once again. Pelosi and the Ds have decided to leave Washington today for a one-week recess without any further action on a terrorist surveillance bill set to expire Friday night.

In a sharp rebuke directed at the WH, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said yesterday his chamber is "not a lap dog of the president ", we are a lap dog of the liberal/moveon.org wing of the party, and don't you forget it!

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | February 14, 2008 3:56 PM | Report abuse

'The leading Republican presidential candidate, Senator John McCain of Arizona, a former prisoner of war, voted against the bill. Mr. McCain said the ban would limit the C.I.A.'s ability to gather intelligence. "We always supported allowing the C.I.A. to use extra measures," he said.'

Posted by: drindl | February 14, 2008 3:54 PM | Report abuse

proud I'm glad you spoke up. I was taking drindle at her word [honestly, just don't ask why] and was fairly surprised by what looks like a flip-flop.

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 3:49 PM | Report abuse

'When the Dems finally made a move to get a vote on the contempt resolutions against White House officials for ignoring subpoenas in the U.S. attorney investigations, the Republicans had a walkout all planned out. As Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) gave a speech haranguing the Dems for "political grandstanding" at a time of dire threats to national security (because work on the surveillance bill has still not been completed). They then filed out onto the steps, where a podium was waiting to complete the photo op.

No political grandstanding, indeed.'

'Congress already banned any military use of waterboarding and other harsh tactics through the Detainee Treatment Act of 2006, which was co-sponsored by Sen. McCain.'

That may be, but the administration continued to use it, as they have admitted, and say they will do it again if they wish. Also the DTA does not cover the CIA, only the military. So Feinberg's amendment was to close that gap. But as McCain said, he didn't want to. He wants the CIA to be free to torture if they wish, so the ban is meaningless.

The DTA did some other stuff too:
'For the DTA to pass muster under the Constitution's Suspension Clause, it must provide an adequate and effective substitute for habeas corpus. But the act does not even come close - it cuts off meaningful judicial review, jeopardizes counsel access, and denies a remedy to the innocent. '

Posted by: drindl | February 14, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Chris writes
"And don't forget that Huckabee very likely has ambitions to wind up on the national ticket either as McCain's vice president or with a second presidential bid of his own down the line."

A week ago, I thought Huckabee might have been angling for a VP spot with McCain. Once he decided to keep the race going, I think he gave up on that possibility.

Posted by: bsimon | February 14, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

drindl, There's plenty of evidence to show where he stands on these things, e.g. Congress already banned any military use of waterboarding and other harsh tactics through the Detainee Treatment Act of 2006, which was co-sponsored by Sen. McCain.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | February 14, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

It could mean that Mitt being named as VP just became closer to a reality. Mitt Romney has really proven that he only has the country's best interest at heart and that he is a true gentleman and Statesman. With John McCain's age a Mitt Romney VP could be very appealing to conservatives. Even though John McCain has a 95 year old mom does not in any way mean that he will live that long. My uncle always talked about how he would easily live to be 100 because of the numerous members of his family who did. He made it just past 60 and passed away without any terminal illness.

Posted by: MrPappy | February 14, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse


'BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will make a landmark visit to Iraq on March 2, the first-ever trip by an Iranian leader, the Iraqi government said Thursday.
Ahmadinejad will meet his Iraqi counterpart as well as Iraq's prime minister.

Ahmadinejad will meet with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and President Jalal Talabani during his two-day visit, according to an Iraqi government spokesman.

"The two countries will discuss bilateral relations and joint projects," spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said.'

Cozy.

'MinA, It is m,y understanding of the vote that McCain did not specifically vote against a ban on waterboarding. He said it was technically already illegal, and voted against this bill because of military/intelligence disagreement.'

No. He said he didn't want to tie the hands of the CIA [hey a pun] or words to that effect. He said he had always been n favor of letting them use 'special techniques'. Whether or not it was/is illegal is in question. If it is illegal, then the Administration, which openly states it was used, is guilty of a crime. If it's not illegal, then McCain voted against making it illegal.


Posted by: drindl | February 14, 2008 3:28 PM | Report abuse

"McCain, who has helped lead efforts to strip some earmarks from Senate bills, has not focused on the money headed to his home state."

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

MinA, It is m,y understanding of the vote that McCain did not specifically vote against a ban on waterboarding. He said it was technically already illegal, and voted against this bill because of military/intelligence disagreement.

I don't have any problem with that at all, and it is apparent that the left will now seek every opportunity to mischaracterize his every vote in the Senate. Interesting to note that the two other Senators/candidates didn't vote at all.

Perhaps this is why Sen McCain is thinking about vacating his Senate seat early as he engages in the general election campaign. It's clear that his opponents have enough fodder to smear him with, after his 20 years' worht of votes.

It has been apparent throughout the primary that McCain is a man of principle and that has not changed.

Posted by: proudtobeGOP | February 14, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Blarg -- Well said. Next topic.

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Is Romney's position now somewhat like John Edwards position in 2004?

Edwards got on the ticket; his campaign didn't end until November. But afterward it looked as if he were in a good position. Not many Democrats disliked him, he was widely known, he had a strong fundraising base and could afford to spend lots of time prepping the electoral battlefield.

All these advantages turned out to be illusory. Edwards turned out to be the first choice of a relatively small number of Democrats; he couldn't run on his resume, and he found opponents who could raise as much money as he could. Why isn't Romney in the same kind of bind?

Romney could spend the next four years campaigning, or noodling aroung giving speeches before Republican audiences. But the guy's no Ronald Reagan, and by 2012 he will have been out of public office for a really long time. The professional conservatives in Washington and the radio clowns only came around to Romney after it became clear that the hated McCain was the alternative, and that's not a foundation for continued loyalty in a campaign four years from now.

If I were Romney, I might consider moving to Michigan and running for governor. If he won, he could accomplish something worthwhile in public service, and maybe build a platform from which to seek national office later. Of course, maybe not. It just doesn't look to me like he has such a platform now.

Posted by: jbritt3 | February 14, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

What a bunch of two-faced flip floppers. Watch the Huckabee voters just stay home.

Posted by: thebobbob | February 14, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

It means that Mitt Romney is a Republican, and he's endorsing the Republican nominee for President. There was a slight possibility that Huckabee could get enough delegates to deny McCain a majority, so that he and Romney could make a deal to become the nominees. But that was extremely unlikely.

Are you going to have a post like this every time a Republican endorses the Republican nominee? There was a similar post about governors the other day. This is going to get old quickly, as practically every Republican is going to endorse McCain.

Posted by: Blarg | February 14, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Well, so much for Romney. The GOP can focus on Obama now, as McCain is already doing. It'd be interesting to see if he succeeds where Clinton fails.

Posted by: mike-straight | February 14, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Interesting point Nowickiman.

Posted by: davidmwe | February 14, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

The reason that Romney did it was that with his delegates - and his number actually increased in California as they are counting VBM and other dropped off on the day of election (he has won 4 Congressional Districts and it is likely to go to 7 which are 21 delegates)- he puts McCain over the top and shuts down Huckabee who Romney blames for his defeat.

Had Huckabee not won in Iowa, McCain would have lost NH and the rest is history.

Posted by: Nowickiman | February 14, 2008 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Romney and McCain are the two biggest windbags on the planet. They deserve each other.

Posted by: bondjedi | February 14, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

I still can not figure out why they are all jumping on the McCain bandwagon... I guess they sort of have to, but gosh, it looks all but in the bag, a race between Obama and McCain:

http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=48

Posted by: davidmwe | February 14, 2008 2:49 PM | Report abuse

other than what bsimon said, nothing at all.

I can see McCain's much-needed indy voters swooning over the news of the Mittens endorsement. NOT

Posted by: Spectator2 | February 14, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

It means Romney is preparing for a run in 2012 or 2016.

Posted by: bsimon | February 14, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

quix·ot·ic

1. resembling or befitting Don Quixote.
2. extravagantly chivalrous or romantic; visionary, impractical, or impracticable.
3. impulsive and often rashly unpredictable.

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 2:43 PM | Report abuse

What does the endorsement mean?

McCain/Romney '08

Posted by: USMC_Mike | February 14, 2008 2:41 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company