Centerfield

Santos Versus Vinnick

I am a West Wing fanatic... seriously, it is unhealthy. I sat and watched every minute of the last season hoping that it wasn't going to be over. This hope was based upon what I believed to be an outstanding story line regarding the made for television Presidential race between Democrat Matthew Santos, an upstart minority Congressman with a knack for angering teacher unions and spreading a message of hope, and Arnie Vinnick, a straight talking old school moderate Republican U.S. Senator who was in the twilight of his career.

Young versus old. Classic Republican ideals of the free-market, less government, big defense, and lower taxes, versus the Classic Democratic ideal that the government plays a role in giving people a step up and for solving our most serious problems such as global warming, poverty, and immigration. Two individuals who were in it for the right reasons... service and a belief that they could provide the change the American people wanted. I remember thinking at the time... wouldn't this be cool if it actually happened?

On March 4th, if Obama wins Texas, I think we are going to get incredibly close to Vinnick versus Santos. All I can say to the American people after the nomination of McCain and Obama, if he wins, is congratulations on a job well done. I think we have two potential nominees who are in their heart of hearts extremely good men, both can make outstanding Presidents, and both will inspire confidence in the hearts of most Americans that this is still the greatest and most compassionate nation on God's earth.

In the end I was holding out for Vinnick, and I can't imagine a scenario where I will actually vote against John McCain... although I have pondered it. I simply believe his experience is a good fit at the right time. As a Republican he can make actual progress on issues like global warming, energy independence, and immigration, because he isn't attached to the same groups that Mitt Romney would have been... he can negotiate with the Democrats and bring along enough Republicans.

Senator McCain was right about the surge and is right that withdrawal from Iraq will not lead to anything but dire consequences. His efforts to support increasing troop levels, in the face of poll numbers that almost ended his campaign for President, is the right kind of leadership in a post-9/11 world. I don't doubt for a second that the Senator is tough enough or experienced enough to lead this country.

Both candidates will have their challenges.

On the issues, Obama is in trouble. On things that the American people agree with Democrats over Republicans, McCain has for the most part parted with his party. Although Obama got opposition to the Iraq war right, at least politically speaking, McCain was right about the surge. However, the straight talk express will derail if the McCain campaign allows their candidate to be framed as the guy who acted like a regular politician 10% of the time, rather than the guy that took on his own party, special interest groups, and K Street the other 90%.

The New York Times piece is crap, but for maybe the first time, it isn't the sex or the lack their of that matters. Over the next nine months John McCain's long congressional career is going to be torn to pieces. Every event he went to with a lobbyist, every plane ride, every letter, and every donation is going to be investigated... we haven't even begun to discuss Charles Keating. Yes, they are going to do the best they can to knock that halo off of his head.

The good news for McCain is that Mr. Obama has also done some double talk when it comes to relationships with lobbyists and corporate interests. The guy who wants to publically finance Federal campaigns, and I fully agree, has been the darling of private contributors who are going to expect to have his ear in January of 2009. Obama understands that the game must be played if he is to be elected and create all that hope he keeps talking about, which is going to make it pretty difficult to cry foul over any letters Senator McCain has written in the past.

Obama's bigger problem; however, is a lack of specifics and a lack of identity. Because he has stated a very eloquent, but very general case for change during the nomination process, many do not really know who he is. Is he the author of the Audacity of Hope who called for more cooperation between opposing ideologies, the great mediator, or the guy who convinced conservatives to elect him President of the Harvard Review? Or is he, as the National Journal states, the most liberal member of the Senate, the leftist State Senator from Chicago, or the guy who all of a sudden went negative on free trade agreements in order to knock off Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin and Ohio? Hope will get Senator Obama to about 45 - 47%, but then he has got to start convincing independent voters that he is capable of tackling major international and domestic issues, and he hasn't even begun to scratch the surface in regards to details.

In the end, it will be close like it was in 2000 and 2004. Unlike Presidential elections since 1968, it is possible the political map will shift, significantly altering the political strategies of both campaigns. We have two nominees who won mostly because of votes that were cast in primaries and caucuses of states that were not strong holds of their political party. McCain's base of support came from the Northeast and the West, where Obama's victories were largely in the South and the Midwest.

It is entirely possible that McCain can be victorious by winning in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and New Hampshire, where his patriotic service, maverick tendencies, and national security experience will play well with blue collar Americans. On the other hand, it is possible that Obama can win by inspiring African Americans to vote for the first time in places like Georgia, South Carolina, and Louisiana, as well as independent spirits in New Mexico, Colorado, Montana, and Iowa.

Like Vinnick versus Santos, we are in for a very entertaining nine months. Will McCain try to solidify the South by picking a conservative like Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue or South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford? Or, will he attempt to build a new coalition of Republicans by going with former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, former New York Mayor Rudy Guiliani, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, former Governor Christie Todd Whitman, or Senator Joe Lieberman?

Will Obama pick somebody from a Democratic stronghold with more experience like California Senator Dianne Feinstein, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, Delaware Senator Joe Lieberman, or former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley? Or will he too try and build a new coalition by picking a moderate from a red state like Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, or New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson? Or... can Obama do both by picking *gasp* Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton or former Georgia Senator Sam Nunn?

Will the campaign be respectful like Vinnick versus Santos? Will the debates or the conventions matter? What role will the Clinton’s and Al Gore play? What role will George W. Bush play? Will McCain's temper ever get the best of him or will Obama's inexperience ever get the best of him? Will either candidate make a proposal outside of the traditional views of their political parties?

Whew! We haven't even discussed the possibility that Hillary Clinton could still win in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania, setting up the first contested national convention since Reagan and Ford.