July 6, 2007

McCain's Prospects Look Pretty Grim

The New Republic: Money Woes, '08 Calendar Make A Comeback Unlikely

  • Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., answers a question during a news conference in Greenville, S.C., on June 25, 2007. He trailed his Republican rivals in second-quarter fundraising, leading to speculation that his campaign may not be able to survive into 2008.

    Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., answers a question during a news conference in Greenville, S.C., on June 25, 2007. He trailed his Republican rivals in second-quarter fundraising, leading to speculation that his campaign may not be able to survive into 2008.  (AP Photo/Nell Redmond)

(The New Republic)  This column was written by John B. Judis.

The release of the second-quarter fundraising totals spells trouble for two presidential candidates: Democrat John Edwards and Republican John McCain. Edwards has always been a long shot for the nomination, but McCain was once the Republican frontrunner and expected (by me, among others) to have an easy path to the nomination. His candidacy is in now a shambles — and for more reasons than money.

When former Senator Phil Gramm was running for the Republican presidential nomination in 1996, he used to cite "Huckaby's Law," named after political consultant and fundraising expert Stan Huckaby. Huckaby's Law said that the presidential candidate who raised the most money by January 1 of election year would inevitably win the nomination. John Connally had defied the law in 1976, but that was before public financing kicked in.

Gramm ended up confirming Huckaby's Law. Bob Dole beat him by $4 million and then won the nomination. In 2004, however, Senator John Kerry overturned Huckaby's Law by losing the fundraising primary to Howard Dean (Dean raised $47 million to $32 million for Kerry by January 31, 2004) but still won the nomination.

What about 2008? There is no reason to accept Huckaby's Law as an immutable law of physics. If two candidates can raise roughly the same amounts — let's say $110 million to $100 million — then, all other things being equal, they should be able to compete equally for the nomination. But if the margin is any larger — if it is comparable to Dean's five-to-three edge over Kerry in 2004 — then the candidate raising less money will be at a significant disadvantage — more so than in any previous election. That's because of the changes in the primary schedule.

In the past, the early phase of the presidential race — lasting into March — was concentrated in several relatively low-cost caucuses and primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. If a candidate did well in two of these, as Kerry did in 2004, he could make up an edge in fundraising before the big primary week of Super Tuesday a month later, when the number of primaries and the size of the collective electorate put a premium on paid advertising. But this year, Iowa and New Hampshire will be followed on January 19 by Nevada, then on January 29 by Florida, which will occur the same Tuesday as South Carolina, which will be followed the next week by some 23 primaries and caucuses, including California, New York, Texas, New Jersey, Georgia and Michigan. Candidates who trail significantly in the money race on January 1 will not have time to raise enough money to compete in Florida on January 29 and in 23 states on February 5.

Among the Democrats this year, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are both going to have enough money to compete. But John Edwards, who raised only $9 million in the last quarter, compared to $32.5 million for Obama and $27 million for Clinton, looks like he is going to fall by the wayside. The problem is a practical one. Edwards is hoping that a victory in the Iowa Caucuses on January 14 will boost his chances — but given the condensed primary schedule, a victory probably won't help him enough if he doesn't already have the money to pay for advertising in the big states. Of course, Edwards could follow Steve Forbes' precedent and make a huge loan to his campaign.

Among the Republicans, John McCain also faces money problems. In the second quarter, he raised $11 million, compared to $17 million for Rudy Giuliani and $14 million for Mitt Romney. By itself, Giuliani and Romney's edge over McCain isn't decisive, but what is significant is that Giuliani's totals increased $2 million from the last quarter while McCain's declined by $2 million. McCain also has much less money in the bank than his rivals, and he has had to lay off staff. His difficulties in fundraising, combined with his slide in opinion polls (which makes it still more difficult to raise money) suggests that his campaign is in serious trouble.

If Edwards' lackluster fund-raising is simply the result of being overshadowed by his Democratic rivals, McCain's decline reflects a flawed campaign strategy. He set out to become the "Republican establishment" candidate. In doing so, he was relying on a law of his own — the Republican propensity to nominate former runner-ups for president: George H.W. Bush in 1988, Bob Dole in 1996. Once a fierce foe of George W. Bush, McCain tied his candidacy to the president this time around. He eagerly defended Bush's prosecution of the Iraq war — "We elected him, we need him, he needs to do well and the country needs him," McCain declared in March 2006 — and he hired the president's former operatives, including Terry Nelson, Bush's former political director, who became McCain's campaign manager.

His strategy relied on rerunning the 2000 campaign, but with one important difference: McCain would play himself and Bush. McCain hoped to retain the loyalty of the self-described independents and moderates who helped him win states like New Hampshire and Michigan in 2000, while winning over enough conservatives to defeat a challenger from the right like former Senators George Allen or Rick Santorum. He focused his efforts heavily on South Carolina, where Bush had upended him in 2000. McCain won endorsements from many of the same South Carolinians who had backed Bush's vicious attacks against him. He hoped to wrap up the nomination early by winning New Hampshire and South Carolina.

McCain also tried to alter his political image sufficiently to attract diehard conservative Republicans as well as moderates and independents. To appease the religious right, he now claimed to favor the reversal of Roe v. Wade. To appease anti-taxers annoyed by his opposition to the Bush tax cuts, he now backed a continuation of those cuts. And he trumpeted his ability to win the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq.

As his poll and fund-raising numbers illustrate, this strategy appears to have failed. McCain has not been able to alter his image sufficiently to attract conservative donors or voters. Unlike, say, Mitt Romney, McCain has not been able to perform an ideological makeover. His apostasy in 2000 and during Bush's first term is too well known to conservatives. Indeed, his standing among Republican conservatives has declined still further in the last two months because of his support for allowing 12 million illegal immigrants to remain in the United States. For Republican conservatives, opposition to illegal immigration has replaced opposition to abortion as the dividing line between who they will and won't support. And McCain falls on the wrong side of the line.

McCain hoped his stand in favor of the war in Iraq, and most recently of the administration's "surge" strategy, would help him among Republican conservatives. But perhaps because of his stand against the administration's treatment of enemy combatants, Republicans have failed to acknowledge his support for the war. In a Pew poll last month, Republican voters who rate Iraq as a "very important" issue favor Giuliani, former Senator Fred Thompson, and Romney over McCain. Only 20 percent favor McCain in comparison to 39 percent for Giuliani even though the former New York mayor has no foreign policy experience and has displayed a tenuous grasp of Iraq's political and ethnic divisions.

The absence of conservative support has left McCain as the candidate of independents and moderates, as he was in 2000. But McCain has had to divide this vote with Giuliani and, in the Northeast, with Romney. Most revealing is a SurveyUSA poll last month of California Republicans, where McCain trailed Giuliani by 32 to 19 percent, Thompson also at 19 percent. McCain bested his 19 percent share among voters who identified themselves as moderate or liberal, were pro-choice, were convinced that the threat of global warming was real, supported same-sex marriage, favored stem-cell research, and didn't own a gun. Oh yes, he was also favored by 24 percent of Republicans who had voted for Kerry in 2004. Unfortunately, Giuliani did somewhat better among these voters, while he and Thompson did much better than McCain among the more conservative voters.

McCain's geographical strategy has also hit the skids. Romney has steadily climbed ahead of McCain in New Hampshire polls, and McCain is now running behind Giuliani in South Carolina, where Republican voters are so up in arms over "amnesty for illegal aliens" that Senator Lindsay Graham, McCain's main backer in the state, may be in political trouble. But in any case, the South Carolina primary has been completely overshadowed by Florida, where McCain is running far behind Giuliani and Thompson.

McCain could bounce back. He is being hurt partly because his heretical past is so well known to Republican voters, and his prospects could improve if more people learn, for instance, that Giuliani is pro-choice and in favor of gun control. But McCain's lag in fundraising hurts his prospects for recovery. And it should continue. Without a conservative grassroots following in the Republican Party, McCain has been more dependent on large donors than his rival candidates. And large contributors want to back a winner.

Now the McCain campaign is talking about taking public financing. But public money won't get him through January. In 2004, the limit on a candidate's spending in the primaries was $40.89 million. It'll be higher this year, but not high enough to compete with McCain's privately financed rivals, who should each raise twice that much before the year is out. Whether one heeds Huckaby's Law or looks at opinion polls in states like Florida and California, McCain's prospects are looking grim.


By John B. Judis
If you like this article, go to www.tnr.com, which breaks down today's top stories and offers nearly 100 years of news, opinion and analysis.



If you like this article, go to www.tnr.com, which breaks down today's top stories and offers nearly 100 years of news, opinion, and criticism.

Add a Comment See all 38 Comments
by toldyouso21 July 9, 2007 12:19 AM EDT
Mcain wants the nomination, he would profess to only run for one term. A kind of healing 4 years. He could then groom a VP to run and be elected. This way, he would show his maverick side and do what is best for the country. If he came out and did this, he would win a landslide.
Posted by rmsdm4 at 05:28 PM : Jul 06, 2007

What makes you think we want one more term of this war--that's 4 more years, not to mention the idiot plays games about bombing Iran --which means expanding the war. I am an independent and I never cared for McCain. Now if Hagel ran, the Republicans would have a better chance. Since most states are either scrapping the GOP dieboldt machines or getting paper trails...the Republicans have little to no chance of not only putting a President back in the oval office, but also...they may lose more in Congress. This has been the worst government of the past 7 years. Bar none.
Reply to this comment
by robertr121 July 8, 2007 11:56 AM EDT
I've never understood why everyone fell for this myth about McCain being a so called political maverick, it was all an act, not so subtley disguised, intended to deceive an all too gullible public an MSM that ate it up hook line and sinker. I for one wasn't fooled for one minute.
Reply to this comment
by Hybdiesel July 8, 2007 12:36 AM EDT
I can't belive a few years ago I was stupid enought to think he was the man of the future. Oh well just a mistake in my political thinking. Now McCain withdraw your nose from Bush and breath some fresh air.
Reply to this comment
by bill1fj July 7, 2007 9:13 PM EDT
The legal citizens of Arizona should recall McCain.
He know longer deserves to represent any legal citizen.
Ask him to resign or be voted out.
Thank You
Reply to this comment
by bill1fj July 7, 2007 8:13 PM EDT
Come on John. Its time for you to drop out of this race.
You're just embarassing your self.
You used to be a hero but after trying to sell out legal citizens by pushing for amnesty for the criminal ILLEGAL aliens you have become a zero.
Its time for you to go home.
Thank You
Reply to this comment
by rfmphd July 7, 2007 5:54 PM EDT
John McCain will have a hard row to hoe in the upcoming Senatorial race. He has lost the support of the Arizona people with his hard, die
for betrayal of the Sovereign citizens of the State. I was in the military and hero's were not those who surrendered. It is acceptable to surrender, but please do not call them hero's. It is an insult to those who died and fought to keep from being taken prisoner.
Reply to this comment
by sjc_1 July 7, 2007 4:44 PM EDT
McCain changed from being a maverick fighting Bush in 2000 to trying to be all things to all people in 2007.

This just does not fit the persona nor the image he created earlier. People may have expected someone that came out against every thing that is wrong and telling us how to fix it.

Instead they got someone that just panders to the base to get the votes. We can get that from just about any candidate. You had it going John, you just lost it for good.
Reply to this comment
by rushlimpdrug July 7, 2007 3:55 PM EDT
- To quote the cop from "The Simpsons"
"Ok, folks keep it moving. . . .
Nothing to see here, move along . . .
No need to slow down and see the wreck . . .
Let's move along . . ."
Reply to this comment
by frankinaz July 7, 2007 3:23 PM EDT
Senator McCain,
Give it up; you are not going to win a Presidential nomination. Come back to Arizona and represent your constituents, for the time being. Do not act like Senator Boxer from California, who puts her national political agenda ahead of her home state's citizens, and disappears until its election time. As Arizona and the Mexico border states are overrun and overwhelmed with illegal immigrants, the illegal immigration legislation you supported was way too weak and ineffective, as is your view on the Iraq war also. Face the
truth; your political career is all but finished.
Reply to this comment
by formrusmcsgt July 7, 2007 2:01 PM EDT
If McCain knows he's sinking, why can't he put what's left of his funds to a candidate more likely to win?

Posted by hypnotoad72 at 10:05 AM : Jul 07, 2007

Because at what, 72 years old?, he knows this is his last hurrah.

McCain, like all politicians, is self-absorbed and is hard pressed to believe that he's missed his last go at the brass ring.
Reply to this comment
by hypnotoad72 July 7, 2007 1:05 PM EDT
If McCain knows he's sinking, why can't he put what's left of his funds to a candidate more likely to win?
Reply to this comment
by formrusmcsgt July 7, 2007 11:53 AM EDT
As McCain withers, the Repubs are left with a philanderer and a guy who believes in magic underwear as their two top candidates. What a joke.

And yet, they criticise the Dem field......
Reply to this comment
by adian1-2009 July 7, 2007 9:14 AM EDT
The guy has a head full of emptyness. That's why even the not-so-brainy conservative republicans do not support this pseudo-hero. Good for the nation that even for the wrong reasons, republicans aren't willing to give a chance to this flip-flop pre-candidate.
Reply to this comment
by kansas1946 July 7, 2007 2:54 AM EDT
John McCain is old news. A one-time hero, speaking for the people, and now desparately licking boots. Really sad. During the 2000 primaray, John McCain is the first national candidate that I ever sent money to. I thought the Republicans were treating him deplorably, but when you want something so badly that you will compromise your standards and sell your soul, you have lost the right to achieve that thing. Good-bye, John. I will honor your memory.
Reply to this comment
by observantx July 7, 2007 2:45 AM EDT

The tale of John McCain is a very sad tale indeed.

Once a man revered for his heroic ordeal while a guest of the Hanoi Hilton, he is now opened spurned by conservative, independent, and liberal alike.

Once a Senator who could forge alliances within his party and across the aisle, he is now treated like a leper.

The sad part is that this all came about through his own puzzling statements and behavior.

He keeps supporting a failing military campaign in Iraq that grows more unpopular every day.

He makes a show of standing up to our fledgling king over torture and then folds after a Kabuki performance that fools nobody. His Hanoi hero credentials now lay in the dust.

He goes sucking up to the religious right for money and votes after castigating them for their past hypocrisies.

What is sadly evident is that he wants the presidency so bad, that he will pander to any and all that he thinks will get him there.

I used to respect the man, but am sad to say, I would be hard pressed to give him the time of day.
Reply to this comment
by mizpah63 July 7, 2007 2:02 AM EDT
John McCain is not a good man. Good men don't change their positions on issues merely as a result of current polling data. Good men don't seek out scoundrels like George Bush, and ask for their blessings. Good men don't involve themselves in S&L scandals. Good men don't condone Karl Rove's outright, malicious propaganda. John McCain's demise will be good for the Republican Party and America.
Reply to this comment
by anonym-2009 July 7, 2007 1:49 AM EDT
McCain, the candidate of independents and moderates? Hurt because of his heretical past that Republican voters supposedly remember?
Are you *** kidding me? Have you been asleep for the past ten years?

McCain has consistently been one of the most conservative senators in Congress, and even if he hadn't been, the average Republican voter has the attention span of a gnat and the memory of a goldfish.
McCain is losing support because he's a hypocritical ****, and he's too obvious about it.
Reply to this comment
by roach9703 July 7, 2007 1:34 AM EDT
McCaine lacks new ideas and direction. He appears to be a prisioner of expectatons and his handlers. The American people are tired of this.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele July 7, 2007 1:19 AM EDT
Dear Anne Frank: Its nice you use that name to post from, but I doubt if you would ever experience anything she experienced; let alone to have the intelligence, at her age, to write what she wrote. And you wrote what you wrote.

Sleep well and remember: tomorrow is another day of hatred.
Reply to this comment
by marcodele July 7, 2007 1:16 AM EDT
I'm amazed that this "liberal media" CBS isn't fronting articles about Barrack Obama or Hillary or Kucinich. All their articles seems to be 'neocon positive.'

Do you suppose the 'liberal media' is trying to be more like Fox News: ignorant, biased, and false?
Reply to this comment
See all 38 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie." Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. House Passes Landmark Health Care Bill

    (478 recent comments)

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: