August 20, 2008

Would a McCain-Lieberman Ticket Really Be That Bad an Idea?

Joe Lieberman, one of John McCain's BFFs, is being floated as a likely VP pick.

Yes, Lieberman is a Democrat, but he's stood steadfastly with the President on the conflict in Iraq, despite the fact that it puts the lefties into conniptions.

Wouldn't a centrist Democrat VP be just the ticket to put the lie to Obama's empty "post partisan" rhetoric?

A true centrist or conservative Democrat VP might not be a bad idea, actually. Bringing a guy like David Boren or Gene Taylor on board the ticket might be a great move. Problem is, Lieberman is so far from "centrist" that you can't even see it from where he stands.

A McCain-Lieberman ticket would make a stark contrast to the Obama campaign over Iraq policy, but it would largely muddy up two otherwise defining issues (abortion and gun rights). Perhaps even worse, it would only exacerbate McCain's existing problems on the immigration issue.

ABORTION:

As with many issues of interest to conservatives, John McCain is decent, but certainly not great, on the right to life. His recent annual ratings from National Right to Life range between 33% (2002) and 82% (2004). He's considered a generally-reliable vote for the pro-life side. Obama, of course, is awful on the abortion issue. He may be the most pro-abortion member of the U.S. Senate--and that's saying a lot.

So, the McCain-Obama matchup presents a pretty clear distinction for pro-lifers. As with many other areas, it's not that McCain is even close to a great choice, but the sheer awfulness of the other option is likely to steer the pro-life grassroots to the polls when the rubber meets the road.

Now, if you throw Lieberman into the mix, you muddy the waters a bit. Lieberman isn't quite as pro-abortion as Obama, but he's been a solid vote for the pro-abortion camp. His recent NRLC ratings range from 0% (in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006) to 7% (in 1998), while racking up 100% ratings from NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Lieberman is nowhere close to the center on abortion. (More data here.)

Adding Lieberman to the ticket has the serious potential to raise new questions in the minds of already wary pro-life voters, causing them to wonder, "who is this McCain guy, and what does he really believe about the right to life?"

GUN RIGHTS:

Gun control presents another area where McCain has a real opportunity to draw distinctions with Obama--IF he plays his cards right.

Although McCain's record on gun rights has often been spotty, and McCain has supported both the Scary-Looking Gun Ban (aka the "Assault Weapons" Ban) and a ban on private transfers of firearms (under the guise of "closing the gun show loophole"), Obama's record on gun rights is abysmal. Although McCain's record doesn't merit better than a mediocre C+ from the NRA, Obama's record as a state senator in Illinois, and in the U.S. Senate, is that of a hardcore, anti-gun zealot. (More here and here.)

Thus, gun rights, like abortion, presents another golden opportunity for McCain to draw clear distinctions with Obama on an issue of policy. Obama is so awful on gun rights that McCain looks like Charlton Heston by comparison.

Throw Lieberman into the mix, however, and the issue gets muddy.

Liberman's annual ratings from Gun Owners of America have ranged between 0% (2005) and 100% (2006), but the vast majority of the time, Lieberman's votes on gun rights issues have placed him in the 7-10% range with GoA, and earned him consistent F's from the NRA. (more data here.) Thus, on gun rights, Lieberman is, again, far from the center. He is, like Obama, a gun-grabber through and through.

Thus, as with the abortion issue, adding Lieberman to the ticket has the potential to raise some very troubling questions in the minds of bitter gun owners in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania, who are notorious for sitting home (or going hunting) when given a ballot choice between bad and worse.

IMMIGRATION:

Unfortunately, McCain and Obama are not far apart on the immigration issue. Philosophically, both are generally in favor of amnesty and open borders lunacy, and everyone pretty much knows it. (The One is still too wet behind the years to have much of a federal track record. McCain's numbers are here.)

Even though McCain is talking tough on border enforcement today, few take him seriously. Border security Republicans are seriously wary of McCain-with very good reason.

That said, John McCain has an opportunity here to create a distinction on immigration with a smart VP pick. A rock-solid border champion like Tom Coburn or Tom Tancredo may be too much for border security advocates to hope for, but there are a lot of Republicans who are solid on the immigration issue and could help McCain reassure the border security crowd that "secure" really means secure.

On that score, however, Lieberman would, yet again, be a move in exactly the wrong direction. He has, like McCain, racked up year after year of dismal ratings from groups like English First, Americans for Better Immigration, FAIR and U.S. Border Control. (Data here).

Thus, a McCain-Lieberman ticket would serve as yet another thumb in the eye of the border security conservatives, at a time when John McCain could really use their help.

CONCLUSION

We all know what the New York Times crowd wants McCain to do. They'd love to have McCain add Lieberman on the ticket. They're still not gonna vote for him, of course--and that's the problem. 80%+ of the folks who think it would be a really cool idea to have a liberal Democrat on the GOP ticket wouldn't vote for a Republican in a million years. At the same time, the conservative grassroots who form the core of the Republican base are already unsure of whether John McCain is on their side. A McCain-Lieberman ticket would only scuff old bruises, raise new questions and divide the GOP base at a time when McCain seriously needs to solidify it.

Free advice to the McCain campaign: just say no to Joe.