McCain: I Could Lose Over War Issue

GOP Frontrunner Says He Won't Win If Americans Don't Believe U.S. Policy In Iraq Is Succeeding; Later Backs Off Remark

(CBS/AP)  John McCain said Monday that to win the White House he must convince a war-weary country that U.S. policy in Iraq is succeeding. If he can't, "then I lose. I lose," the Republican said.

He quickly backed off that remark.

"Let me not put it that stark," the likely GOP nominee told reporters on his campaign bus. "Let me just put it this way: Americans will judge my candidacy first and foremost on how they believe I can lead the county both from our economy and for national security. Obviously, Iraq will play a role in their judgment of my ability to handle national security."

"If I may, I'd like to retract 'I'll lose.' But I don't think there's any doubt that how they judge Iraq will have a direct relation to their judgment of me, my support of the surge," McCain added. "Clearly, I am tied to it to a large degree."

"McCain's candidacy is clearly tied to some extent to the war in Iraq," said CBSNews.com Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs. "But he went further than he knew he should have with these comments. He is going to quickly learn that the rules for general election campaigns are much different than the primaries when it comes to speaking off-the-cuff."

"This is a candidate used to shooting the breeze with reporters in the back of his bus," added Ververs. "Once he becomes the nominee, the media spotlight is far more formal and less forgiving. He won't be able to 'retract' many comments from here on out."

The five-year-old Iraq conflict already is emerging as a fault line in the general election, with the Arizona senator calling for the U.S. military to continue its mission while his Democratic opponents urge speedy withdrawal.

While most Republicans still back the war, many independents and Democrats don't. That presents a significant challenge for McCain and an opportunity for either Barack Obama or Hillary Rodham Clinton.

McCain acknowledged the war will be "a significant factor in how the American people judge my candidacy."

The lead Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, McCain has consistently backed the war although he's long criticized the way it was waged after the Saddam Hussein's fall. He was an original proponent of President Bush's troop-increase strategy, having called for more forces on the ground for several years. Last spring, McCain went all in on the war by embracing it as Bush took heat for boosting troop levels to quell violence.

"We can fail in Iraq," McCain said Monday in an Associated Press interview. But, he added: "I see a clear path to success in Iraq." He defined that as fewer casualties and Iraqi troops taking over security to allow U.S. forces to return home. "All of us want out of Iraq, the question is how do we want out of Iraq," he added.

McCain has signaled that he plans to make Iraq and national security a major part of his general election campaign. Daily, he accuses both Obama and Clinton as wanting to "wave the white flag of surrender." Democrats, for their part, are arguing that McCain's candidacy is simply a continuation of Bush's "failed" policies. They have seized on a previous McCain remark in which he suggested that U.S. troop presence - at some level - could extend 100 years or more.

At a town hall-style meeting in suburban Cleveland, McCain accused Democrats of distorting that comment and sought to explain. "The war will be over soon, the war for all intents and purposes, although the insurgency will go on for years and years and years. But it will be handled by the Iraqis, not by us," he said. Like after other wars, he said, the United States then will decide "what kind of security arrangement we want to have with the Iraqis."

While McCain attracts voters across the political spectrum, he is sure to face resistance this fall for his Iraq position in Ohio and other swing states that have seen high numbers of residents die in Iraq.

Over the next eight months, McCain said he would take the same approach when discussing Iraq that he's taken all year as he won primary after primary on his way to securing the GOP nomination.

Speaking to reporters on his bus, he said he would "tell them that I understand their frustration and their sorrow over the sacrifice that has been made and then I try to explain to them what's at stake and what's going on there now. And that's the best I can do."

McCain said his candidacy will be successful "if I can convince the American people, the people of Ohio, that this is succeeding, that the casualties will continue down, although there are occasional spikes."

"So I have to, and I believe can, make an argument that the surge is succeeding, that we will end this war and have the Iraqis take over those responsibilities as we more and more assume support roles and then withdraw," he added.

McCain recalled reading a USA Today poll that he said showed most people believe the troop-increase strategy is succeeding, and said: "Now, still the majority of Americans want out of Iraq. And, I understand that, too. So do I."

The survey actually found that 43 percent - not a majority - said the troop increase is "making the situation there better," up from 22 percent in July.

Asked why he asked to retract the "I lose" remark, McCain said much else could impact his chances.

"We've got many months to go before the general election," he said. "But is Iraq an important part of the judgment that people will make of me, of course."

[Ruidu]

The GOP and McCain have risen to the level of their incompetence!

[ianlou]

In the history of the United States of America there have only been three presidents who have hit a Presidential Triple Play being that they got elected, reelected and kept their party in the Whitehouse with the next presidential election. They are George Washington, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan.
George Bush Junior does not belong nor deserve to be part of this exclusive list.
Send this failed president a clear message, Vote Democrat in this election.

[wardoglrs]

If Americans Knew For god''s sake wakeup.

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/if-americans-knew-aipac-adl-zionist-control-of-america/2704972319

[alanrobisch]

Americans won the American Revolution.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Iceman_1960 at 09:23 AM : Feb 26, 2008
+ report abuse

I hate to bust your bubble but french support was critical to american victory. that is why the victory at saratoga was considered the turning point of the revolution because it convinced the fr3ench that we had the ability to win. the only other large scale victory was done with the help of about 15000 french troops at yorktown and the french fleet which prevented the british army from being either resupplied or evacuated. I don''t think we would have lost but there is no certainty we would have won if we had not had french support

[leftyintexas]

McCain for once you are sooo right!

[radiob-2009]

Posted by skyk

You are talking about the past democratic party not the present democratic party which has sold its soul to the corporations along with the republicans.

[iceman_1960]

"Well, there is one small comparison in that America had it"s own "Articles of Confederation" phase, the eight year period between the end of the Revolution and the 1789 Constitution, when things were pretty f-ed up."
- Posted by rafterman1 at 09:41 AM : Feb 26, 2008

Americans themselves worked that out. Not some huge French "troop surge."

That"s a big reason for the fact that the American democratic Republic survived even the Civil War.

[skyk-2009]

Need a cup of coffee or are you still having trouble realizing that there is no difference between the two parties? They do not listen to the people unless your name is Gates, Buffet, or Soros.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by radiob at 08:24 AM : Feb 26, 2008
+ report abuse

That is just NOT TRUE and a little look at history CLEARLY shows that. When you look at ALL the important issues of progress, when you look at all the issues of Worker Rights, when you look at issue''s on the enviroment... just about any issue, HISTORY shows that to be untrue. Democrats elected a cripple to the office of President. Under him Social Security came to be, which has prevented how many older Americans from living on the street is unknown. Under him a Workers right to organize and bargain collective became a fact. Under him we formed an entirely NEW economic system, one that took this nation out of the Great Depression into the Greatest Economic Power on earth, a system we held to until the 80''s. Now you may or may not agree with all those points but Difference? Oh my friend there is a VERY big difference and HISTORY is living PROOF of that fact.

[rowdytexan2]

Mr. McCain...hereeeeeeee''s your sign!

[iceman_1960]

The French contributed some 15,000 troops and 50-60 ships to help the Founding Fathers.

The American forces numbered 20,000 Regular Army and 230,000 millitia, for a total of 250,000 troops.

There is no comparison between those numbers, and the situation in Iraq with American troops as we are approaching the 5-year anniversary of the war.

Only those ignorant of American history would even suggest that analogy.

[iceman_1960]

France"s support for the American Revolution can be compared to the support the Iraqi government has been getting from Poland or Slovenia.

Not to the massive American presence in Iraq.

If the French had sent that great a force over, it wouldn"t be known in the history books as
the American Revolution. It would be called the French Revolution.

Americans won the American Revolution. Not the French.

Don"t let any right winger tell you differently.

Americans won the American Revolution.

[singingrick]

McCain has tied his political future to the failed policies of a failed President with no political future. This has failed to win him favor with the fascist wing of his own party.

Is he going to lose?

Of course he is.

[iceman_1960]

"You do not believe we should have a accounting of the money? Or that it would have been better spent here in the US like on alternative energies?"
- Posted by radiob at 09:06 AM : Feb 26, 2008
--------------

Of course we should have an accounting.

"According to them" they are agreeing with me that the money may have been poorly spent.

[iceman_1960]

One right wing geek here tried to excuse the situation with the Iraqi government by saying something like "It took America a long time to get a democratic republic going too."

That"s the sort of comparison that gives apples and oranges a bad name.

We declared our independence in 1776. Four years later, 1780, America was not floundering around as some huge foreign power was propping us up with a "troop surge" and giving us "benchmarks" that we were failing to meet.

[radiob-2009]

According to them we should demand an accounting of the many billions of dollars -- going on a trillion -- in aid and training that has been spent over the last four years on that government, money that -- according to them -- would obviously have been better spent in this Hemisphere, if that is the extent of the Iraqi Government"s "failure to launch."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Iceman_1960


You do not believe we should have a accounting of the money? Or that it would have been better spent here in the US like on alternative energies?

[iceman_1960]

IF

"They say that if U.S. troops withdrew now, the al Maliki government would collapse instantly and al Qaeda would take over."

Pure defeatism that gives the lie to their own rhetoric about the millions of courageous freedom loving Iraqis who risked death to vote in the elections.

[iceman_1960]

"Heavy use of buzzword terms like "defeatism"
- Posted by rafterman1 at 08:47 AM : Feb 26, 2008
--------------

Actually many of the GOP war supporters are confirmed defeatists themselves.

They say that is U.S. troops withdrew now, the al Maliki government would collapse instantly and al Qaeda would take over.

According to them we should demand an accounting of the many billions of dollars -- going on a trillion -- in aid and training that has been spent over the last four years on that government, money that -- according to them -- would obviously have been better spent in this Hemisphere, if that is the extent of the Iraqi Government"s "failure to launch."

[iceman_1960]

The Russians could not thrust their way to Kosovo without coming into conflict with NATO.

Putin has enough problems already without that.

[radiob-2009]

Brian you can play it to the beat of Not Fade Away, my own, a satire of American politics. Key of G,C, and D major though.

[iceman_1960]

"Get ready to fight the Russians over Kosovo lib."
- Posted by hillaryin08 at 08:10 AM : Feb 26, 2008
---------------

Don"t hold your breath until that happens, unless you"re planning to audition as an extra on "The Smurfs."