There are some very interesting admissions from Republicans in today's NYT:
“(McCain's) grandstanding turned out to be right on a lot of things,” said Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia. “More troops in Iraq, earmarks, cutting out some of the spending.”
Many Republicans have now concluded that it is only Mr. McCain’s willingness to challenge recent Republican orthodoxy that has left him in a position to credibly contend for the White House, given public dissatisfaction with Republican leadership.
“If he hadn’t disagreed with us, he wouldn’t have a chance of being president,” said Representative Zach Wamp, Republican of Tennessee. “He is the one guy who can be the candidate for us this cycle.”
Isn't it ironic? By being "difficult" McCain may have saved the Republican Party from absolute collapse this year. (Note: I disagree with many of the things McCain has been "difficult" on. For example, I oppose his campaign finance reform. I also oppose drug re-importation, which he is now advocating).
This, of course, is good news for everyone who enjoys sticking it to the man from time to time.
I, for one, can only hope that my contrarian outbursts will some day pay off for me as they apparently have for McCain ...
By the way, I have this theory that liking or disliking McCain has less to do with your political philosophy than it has to do with other factors, including whether or not you are a contrarian. Without getting too much into it, I think micro-targeting could help identify McCain Republicans versus, say, Romney or Huckabee Republicans. Here's one thought: I bet there is a positive correlation between how much you like John McCain and the number of Johnny Cash cds you own. Again, I have no proof of this. But it is my hypothesis based on observation ...