Find us on Facebook
Follow us on TwitterWill McCain listen?
The conventional political wisdom is Sen. John McCain needs a vice presidential running mate like Eric Cantor.
Cantor is a young, conservative congressman and one of the leaders of House Republicans. He represents the 7th District, which stretches from Richmond northwest to Page and Rappahannock counties — a mixture of state capital and western Virginia conservatism that will, in all likelihood strongly support McCain in November.
McCain’s age and some of his previous stands on issues such as immigration and campaign finance reform have angered the Republican party’s conservative base.
Since vice presidential running mates are supposed to be everything the presidential candidate is not, having the solidly conservative 45-year-old Cantor on the ticket could help revive McCain’s campaign. That’s especially true in Virginia, where McCain finds himself in a tough race that should be a shoo-in for any Republican presidential candidate.
Cantor has the support U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-5th, who has written the McCain campaign on Cantor’s behalf. That takes a lot of political guts because Goode hasn’t actually endorsed McCain.
Goode wrote the campaign that McCain should “look right and not left” when he picks his running mate, and he called Cantor “a consistent conservative” who would “energize the Republican base.”
If nothing else, Cantor has certainly energized Goode.
But the real question is whether it will help McCain, who trails Sen. Barack Obama all over the electoral map. The poll tracking Web site Real Clear Politics reports that if the current opinion polls are correct and the toss-up states were to vote for the candidates that lead them today, Obama would win 322 electoral votes — including Virginia’s 13.
Since it only takes 270 electoral votes to win the presidency, Obama is clearly ahead at this point in the race. Even without the toss-up states, Obama still leads McCain, 238 to 163.
Clearly, McCain’s campaign needs a big boost, and one of the best ways to do that is with the right vice presidential choice.
Rep. Cantor may be that choice, and it certainly doesn’t hurt Goode to make the suggestion.
But Goode’s recommendation would have carried a lot more weight if it came from someone who has actually endorsed McCain. Why listen to someone who’s not ready to endorse you?
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Eric “OVERDOG” Cantor has been on the border line of misconduct due to his association with convicted lobbist Jack Abramoff. He has towed the Republican line by taking money from Smithfield and Swift Foods, companies that knowingly hire illegal immigrants, just like Virgil “NO” Goode.
Yes, John McCain, please please please choose Cantor as your second in command.
Maybe it is time for “all” ultra - conservatives to realize that now is the time to think like Senator John Warner instead of Jesse Helms.
Dear Editorial Board,
I have no quarrel with your interesting opinion about who McCain should pick as VP.
However, I frequently get nettled when reporters, columnists, and editorial boards attempt to set up their arguments with strawmen, such as you did in the editorial.
For example, you set up the opinion piece with the remark that, “The conventional political wisdom is Sen. John McCain needs a vice presidential running mate like Eric Cantor.“
There is no overriding ‘conventional wisdom’ to that effect. There is just as much ‘conventional wisdom’ that he should pick Romney, or someone who is an authority on economics, or someone from a state that is a ‘must win’ in November, or someone he is comfortable with.
Later in your essay you set up a conclusion with what amounts to another strawman: “Since vice presidential running mates are supposed to be everything the presidential candidate is not. . .“
That is an almost indefensible argument. VP running mates are not supposed to be ‘everything the presidential candidate is not.‘
Usually, Presidential nominees pick someone they are comfortable with to be their running mate.
Clinton picked Gore because he was an extension of Clinton’s policy preferences, and not because Gore represented something Clinton lacked. Bush II chose Cheney because they agreed on nearly everything in politics.
I can only recall two or three occasions when VP nominees fit your observation. One could make your argument for Lincoln’s acquiescence in the Republican convention’s choice of Andrew Johnson in 1864, for McKinley’s acquiesence in T Roosevelt as a running mate, and perhaps for Reagan’s choice of Bush.
But all of this is mere quibble. Your essay was a very good one, very thoughtful, easily grasped, which speaks well of your use of language.
I enjoyed it.
Tom Scism
Advertisement