Lieberman Endorses John McCain

December 17th, 2007 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Senator John McCain is having a great week: first two important newspaper endorse him, now Senator Joe Lieberman – the independent – does so as well. Several bloggers / experts such as James Joyner, Roger L. Simon and Marc Ambinder believe that this means that McCain is back.

The Republican race becomes increasingly exciting. Many people – including myself – had declared McCain’s campaign dead a couple of months ago. It now seems, however, that McCain may very well become the comeback kid.

Well, to a degree that is.

As it is, endorsements don’t equal electoral successes. You can talk about a McCain comeback when (and if) McCain starts rising in the polls in important states and when he wins in at least one of those states. If he finishes second in New Hampshire and doesn’t win any other early state, well, it’s a Huckabee-Romney race. What we can say, however, is that McCain is now in the position that he could make a comeback.

And that’s quite an accomplishment.

Meanwhile, we have to wonder what the Huckabee-surge and a possibly McCain-surge will mean for the larger race. Patrick Ruffini has a great post up in that regard concluding that the Republican nomination is now Romney’s to lose.

The race began as McCain-Romney. After, Rudy! Fred! Huck! it would be a particularly cruel joke on the punditocracy should it end that way. But given the depths to which McCain has had to sink to rekindle the flame, he would face Romney in a much weakened state. Indeed, it would be deeply ironic if McCain manages to weaken his good friend Rudy Giuliani in New Hampshire, only to be hand the nomination to Mitt Romney, his arch-nemesis. In this way, a vote for McCain in New Hampshire is a vote for Romney.

So, unless Rudy manages to turn the election into a referendum on leadership-in-a-time-of-crisis in the next three weeks, at least how it stands now, say hello to Mitt Romney as our nominee.

As I see it, it’s a Romney-Huckabee race right now, with the possibility of a McCain comeback and a Giuliani offensive. Many moderates and traditional conservatives will, I think, rally around Romney at this moment in an attempt to stop Huckabee. For McCain to make a comeback, he’ll have to convince Republican voters that he too can stop Huckabee.

And Giuliani? Ruffini is right: he has to change the tone of the debate or he’ll be in trouble.

Also be sure to read this post by co-blogger Dan Pawson.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Dan
    December 17th, 2007 at 14:18
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Interesting that Ruffini thinks this race started as Romney-McCain. When was the last time you could reasonably say, "I don’t know if Rudy is running for president"? 2003? 2004?

  2. Michael van der Galien
    December 17th, 2007 at 14:30
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Dan: I agree with that. I think you can’t possibly say that it was a Romney-McCain race from the get-go. You’re right to point that out. It was more of a McCain-Giuliani-Romney race.

  3. Kevin Sullivan
    December 17th, 2007 at 17:05
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Rudy has been running so long though that it has become a forgotten reality.  Romney vs. Huckabee has only added to this, and now that he’s apparently withdrawing from NH, it makes Rudy even more forgettable. 

    His Florida strategy is interesting, albeit unlikely to work. 

  4. Interested
    December 17th, 2007 at 18:59
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Senator John McCain is having a great week: first two important newspaper endorse him, now Senator Joe Lieberman – the independent – does so as well

    Good on Lieberman and good for McCain.  Obviously a better race with McCain staying in it.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.