The Judgment of John McCain

The first national decision of consequence that a nominee for President makes is the choice of a running mate. How this choice was made, what critieria (were) used to make the pick and what views and experience the vice presidential candidate brings to the ticket are legitimate areas for scrutiny. The selection process itself is a window into how the presidential nominee thinks. The choice reveals something about the judgment of the nominee and how that person will make decisions as President.


Senator McCain, at best, seems to have rushed into the choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. There are legitimate questions about her that have been overlooked in the vetting process itself. What foreign policy experience does Gov. Palin have? What is her thinking on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and American foreign policy in the Middle East and other troubled areas of the world? Senator McCain has made national security a paramount issue in his campaign for the presidency, yet his chosen V. P. candidate has no substantive national security experience. What does it say about the judgment of John McCain when he doesn't require his running mate to have experience in the very area McCain regards as critical to the future course of the United States?

Personal attacks on the Palin family are wrong. Senator Obama has clearly said that the children of a potential nominee should be off limits to partisan political attack. The choice of Gov. Palin for the Republican ticket is questionable on the merits of Palin's record and stated positions on the issues. Her selection raises questions about Senator McCain's judgment and the vetting process employed in selecting this Vice Presidential candidate. These are serious questions and deserve serious answers from the McCain campaign. The News Herald of Panama City, Florida had an editorial online that speaks to these concerns as well:

Media reports have raised concerns that the McCain campaign did not do a thorough job vetting Palin before she was chosen (a charge the campaign has vigorously rebutted). If the decision to tap the Alaskan was hasty, made from the gut without ample information, that makes the differentiation between Palin's experience and judgment even more acute. How deep is McCain's knowledge of the governor's performance? How much does he know about the way she made her decisions, the deals she cut and the compromises she made (or didn't make)? Is McCain confident that the initial burst of Palin stories was just the obligatory opening fanfare of media scrutiny that was to be expected, or has his campaign realized it has rappelled down a well whose bottom can't be seen?


The Los Angeles Times stated on Saturday that it found the choice of Gov. Palin, given her lack of national experience, to be a gamble for Senator McCain:

Let's be honest: The learning curve that confronts Palin is the steepest facing a vice presidential candidate in recent memory. That McCain was willing to take this gamble may not be a sign of desperation, but it gives a new and unsettling meaning to his claim to be a maverick.

The New York Times also weighed in with an editorial on Wednesday that asks what the choice of Gov. Palin says about the judgment of John McCain:

If John McCain wants voters to conclude, as he argues, that he has more independence and experience and better judgment than Barack Obama, he made a bad start by choosing Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska.

Mr. McCain's supporters are valiantly trying to argue that the selection was a bold stroke that shows their candidate is a risk-taking maverick who - we can believe - will change Washington. (Mr. Obama's call for change - now "the change we need" - has become all the rage in St. Paul.)

To us, it says the opposite. Mr. McCain's snap choice of Ms. Palin reflects his impulsive streak: a wild play that he made after conservative activists warned him that he would face an all-out revolt in the party if he chose who he really wanted - Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.

The McCain campaign wants to pretend that any objections to Gov. Palin as a V.P. choice are somehow improper. Questioning the amount of time that went into this important choice and the depth of the vetting process itself is not improper. It is a way of sounding out the judgment that Senator McCain employed in making this choice. That judgment should be probed and questioned. It is a vital way to take a measure of Candidate McCain and project forward what his judgment and decision making process as President would look like. That is a very legitimate area for questions and something Candidate McCain should address.

5 Comments

New comments for this entry are closed.

I hate to disagree with such a great post, but I’ve been wondering if McCain didn’t choose Palin because she has been proven to be SO DISTRACTING in terms of her family and her personality.  When you’re as weak on the issues as McCain/Palin, you have to soak up attention somehow….

Posted by democrafty ( www ) | 09/03/08, 02:52 PM EST

We have known her for 7 days. She made a good speech on one day, campaigned for 2 others and was hidden away for 2 others.

That’s not a very high batting average.

Posted by Red in GA | 09/05/08, 03:46 AM EST

Ed Rollins has written a piece “Obama was wrong to spurn Hillary ...” The last two sentences of that made me think about Mr. McCain again. Here’s what I wrote as a comment on that Rollins’ blog.

You say: “There are eight weeks left to make the sale. And so far not enough voters are buying either product.”
I say: I can sell the McCain-Palin ticket saying the following. Vote for Mcain. He is a true Maverick. He used to read literature when he should have studied the dos and don’ts in aircraft flying. As a result he sank his plane and fumbled his way out. If you want the US sunk in the same manner he is the best choice. Among many of his recent pranks is the Palin pick for VP. We were hoping that he would pick a seasoned politician like Bobby Jindall or someone with a bipartisan appeal like Lieberman he came up with a pin-up, who keeps on asking “What does a VP do?”.
I think no judgement on McCain should go without the mention that according to his biography, how dangerous a maverick he is.
Muhammad

Posted by Muhammad Zafrullah in Pocatello, ID ( www ) | 09/08/08, 04:20 PM EST

The Republicans have nominated a man who has served and loves his country just as much as any community organizer and Democrat does. As a senator he has shown his independence from his party on some very important issues, but on the two great issues of this election (1) How to rebuild the American Dream? (2) How to restore Americans leadership in the world? John McCain still embraces the extreme philosophy that has defined the Republican Party for more than 25 years.

It’s a philosophy that many non-political Americans and the world didn’t get to see until 2001. In 2001 the Republicans finally gained control of the Congress and the White House, then we saw what has happened to America. They had the opportunity to implement the policies they’ve talked about for decades into action to see if they would work.

We see how that has worked. From record surpluses to an exploding debt. From over 22 million new jobs to now just 5 million. From increasing working families incomes from nearly $7500 a year to a decline of $2000 a year. From nearly 8 million Americans lifted out of poverty to more than 5 million driven into poverty and millions of families losing their homes, jobs and health insurance.

Now they want you to believe that they’re a party of mavericks. —– Please.

The Grand Ole Party has nominated a man who has acted as a maverick in previous years, but has now lost his independence and maverick credentials and adopted the extreme conservatism and prohibitive ideology that has inspired his party for decades.

Where did all the good Republicans go?

Besides Jack Kemp, Chuck Hagel, J.C. Watts and a few others the Karl Roves and Dick Cheney’s of the party or resting in peace silence most of them.

In 2000 John McCain could have been counted among the Good Republicans, but now he has adopted 90% of the polices endorsed by George W. Bush.

How much does a maverick go for these days?

Posted by Tim Valentine in Nashville, TN ( www ) | 09/13/08, 07:07 PM EST

n1WaNr gki8Tvqq3PngJ02lH

Posted by slupy in yierFRytEzKnhfCGLDl ( www ) | 09/17/08, 10:27 PM EST