Wag the Blog Redux: Impact of the McCain Story?
Last week we asked the Fix community whether the New York Times story that alleged a too-close relationship between Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and a female lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, might hurt the Arizona senator's presidential campaign.
The fact that, less than one week after it ran, the story has all but disappeared from the headlines suggests it won't have all that much effect this fall. Here's a few of the most insightful comments from Fixistas who saw it as a non-story from the get-go. (Big props to post.com politics producer Sarah Lovenheim who helped cull the more than 180 responses to the original post.) The conversation continues here.
The Stories Are Harmless:
dbitt: "It could end up being a net positive for McCain, if the kneejerk conservative NYT-hatred propels them to circle the wagons around "the victim"... Wouldn't be at all surprised if he was a little too close to this lobbyist... and if he was, if there's any hint of corroboration out there, the press won't let it go."
PBL4: "Well, since the story seems to be long on insinuation and short on substance, I think this can only HELP him. Those that hated him already will hate him, but I think many conservatives who might have been on the fence will now support him. Sean Hannity has already started defending him! "
howleless: "The story itself is probably going to die in a few days. McCain's problem is going to be, he issued a denial of such staggering breadth: "At no time have I ever done anything that would betray the public trust of made a decision which in any way would not be in the public interest or would favor anyone or organization." That is an invitation to reopen his role in the Keating savings and loan scandal , and hoo boy, does he not want the express to go there. This statement may wind up paired with Gary Hart's, "Follow me. You'll be very bored."
The comments to this entry are closed.