Meghan McCain is Awesome
“I am proud to join you in challenging the mold and the notions of what being a Republican means. I am concerned about the environment. I love to wear black. I think government is best when it stays out of people’s lives and business as much as possible. I love punk rock. I believe in a strong national defense. I have a tattoo. I believe government should always be efficient and accountable. I have lots of gay friends. And yes, I am a Republican.”
—Meghan McCain, addressing the Log Cabin Republicans
I can’t help wondering, if Steve Schmidt had remained in charge, Joe Lieberman was chosen as the Vice President nominee (as McCain wanted), John himself decided to refuse to kowtow to cynicism and the most polarizing elements of his base, and Meghan McCain had taken an active role in shaping the campaign, what the 2008 election (and by extension, the political environment of today) might have looked like.
In truth? I think McCain would have lost by a slightly narrower margin, the radical changes in the Republican philosophy as practiced by his campaign would have gotten the blame, and the party would now be retrenching around the theocon right.
Sometimes you have to move backwards to move forwards.
Comment by Rojas — 4/19/2009 @ 8:31 pm
one can only speculate as to the possible political game-changing power of Meghan McCain’s “I have a Tattoo” speech…
:)
Comment by Kaligula — 4/20/2009 @ 9:27 am
Have to agree with Kaligula’s comment. She comes off as a bit of a half-wit who speaks in only the most cliched ideas of moderate Republicanism. She’s a real “Valley Girl” type who seems to have grown up her whole life voting Republican because that’s what her parents vote, but she can’t verbalize a compelling case for her brand of conservatism. If she actually had something unique or thought-provoking to say about her crusade to single-handedly change conservatism for the better, that would be alright, but she doesn’t seem nearly informed enough for such a challenge.
I’ve heard her name mentioned by a few people here and there (in public, that is) and I think the general consensus of her is not as positive as yours. In fact, most people I’ve talked to seem to think she is kind of…milking the fifteen minutes? I don’t really agree with that 100 percent…I think she’s actually serious about all this, but still relatively worthless in terms of the political discussion. She’s isn’t saying anything that hasn’t already been said (and said better) by countless other people who aren’t getting as much attention as her.
Saying things like “I love punk rock!” and “Look how edgy I am, a Republican with a tattoo!” is not awesome or inspiring or something that is going to have a lasting effect. It’s unimportant, hackneyed (from a speech writing point of view), and overall, just really shallow. It conveys a clear lack of ability to think deeper than in blanket stereotypes, and I don’t think it’s really impressing that many people, even those who agree that the Republican party should become increasingly moderate.
Comment by K_Wright — 4/20/2009 @ 3:10 pm
That’s sort of the point though, isn’t it? The “getting more attention than your usual person” part?
I’ve no idea why your read of her comments here indicate to you she’s dumb and a valley girl. Clearly, her comments above are intended as a pithy intro to a larger speech. You seem a little judgmental here, though I’m not sure why.
In any event, Meghan McCain is clearly not going to be a leading intellectual mover and shaker in political science circles, but it’s a little naive to think that the only people pushing the political conversation forward are Deep Thinkers, or that the only people that matter to a political movement are dry sketchers of ideological thinking. Politics is cultural as much as it is intellectual, believe it or not, and it’s in that niche, not the William F. Buckley one, that someone like Meghan McCain can be of use (and, incidentally, it’s on that niche that Meghan asks us to meet her). She’s got some name recognition, some demographic appeal simply based on the fact that she’s a young woman, and something of a platform that, as you say, others don’t have. I agree that she’s milking her 15 minutes, and I bet she would too. Here’s the thing though: she’s not really milking it for her own benefit. There’s a difference between self-aggrandizing and using what soapbox you have to make a social point. Meghan, it seems to me, is clearly doing the latter. It’s hard for me to view that as somehow exploitative or ego-driven.
Look at it for what it is. Meghan McCain is not going to write a treatise on the economic balance of power between the branches of government, but her failure to do so doesn’t make her dumb. A party that consisted of nothing more than eggheads wouldn’t get very far. It also needs popularizers. What Meghan McCain CAN do is use her quasi-fame and demographic appeal to bring a message of social tolerance and cultural currency into some corners of audience that you or I wouldn’t have access to. That strikes me as a positive thing (and it’s not just because I have a crush on her!).
Comment by Brad — 4/20/2009 @ 3:24 pm
A bit more in depth an account of her remarks.
Comment by Brad — 4/20/2009 @ 4:30 pm
But the thing is, Brad…she’s not getting attention from the people. She’s getting attention from the media. So while she may hold the media’s interest, I really don’t think she has a demographic as you say. I think that most people either A — don’t care about her or B — think she is just simply milking a national spotlight. I guess it would be harsh for me to call her dumb, as I’m sure she’s not, but she is uninformed, and she comes off that way when she’s trying to grandstand and wax philosophical about her tattoos and why they make her special. The valley girl thing is true though. Her general speaking style — maybe not in this speech, which I didn’t watch, but on appearances such as the View, which I did watch — is very valley girlish. Complaining about how hard her dad’s campaign made it for her to get dates is valley girlish…there’s no denying it. I don’t think she’s a good representative of young Republicans or moderate Republicans or young moderate Republicans because she seems frivolous.
My problem with this platform you say she has is exactly what I just said — her main audience is the media itself, not the people watching it. I don’t think she has even quasi-fame. I think at best, she is someone who talks a lot to interviewers and says nothing. Republicans, for the most part, don’t like her, and everyone else, for the most part, sees her as inconsequential. She’s not useful in cultural politics because she can’t say anything that resonates with people. “Ann Coulter is confusing and mean” and “We need more Gay republicans!” is not useful and it’s not anything that anyone cares about, not because it isn’t intrinsically worthwhile, but because they have heard it 5,000 times from 5,000 different people. I’m not saying she isn’t correct on that, but it’s the same thing over and over again and she thinks people want to hear it just because she’s Megan McCain.
To sum it up, my issue with her is this: She is the type of person who is sitting around saying “What should the Republican party do next to appeal to more voters?” However, she is doing so under the pretense of being someone who is actually helping Republicans appeal to more voters. In essence, she is asking the question and thinking she is answering it simply because she asked the question. That’s not helping, it’s attention-seeking.
Comment by K_Wright — 4/20/2009 @ 5:42 pm
Eh, agree to disagree I guess.
Do check out the link in my comment above for more extended comments.
and
And (a knock either on pro-life voters or pro-war voters, depending on your read:
These are not strictly speaking earth-shattering revelations, but neither are they the milquetoast nothing-speak of mindless prattle you suggest. They are more than a little subversive, and frankly, in talking about the direction of the party, I don’t think, and I don’t think anybody thinks, that the problem is that there are too many Republican activists saying these things.
She may not have a big audience, but she certainly has an audience. She got a fair few young female Republican fans over the election, and as you say The View, Larry King Live, et al. are fairly large platforms. She’s a star in the gay Republican world, though perhaps that’s not helping me make my “large audience” point. But nobody is going to claim her soapbox is large.
But it is real, and it is a soapbox. And, what she’s using it for strikes me as not just laudable because I agree with it, but a bit savvy and subversive because, while you claim out of the blue that she’s “uninformed” (though I don’t know why), she’s not wrong. Certainly, I’d argue that most of the party leaders, the people whose comments you might give more weight to as having large audiences and supposed intellectual heft, are pointing in the wrong direction, and Meghan in the right one. In that respect, I find most of the things that come out of the mouths of John Boehner, National Review, Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Mitch McConnell, Rush Limbaugh, and a lot of other Republican “heavy lifters” to be a lot more wrong-headed, vapid, cynical, and, indeed, naive, then the things Meghan is saying.
She’s easy to dismiss because, as you say, she does come off as Valley Girlish. She’s a female. She’s pretty. She’s young. She is not as erudite as some. But contrary to your assertion that she’s late to the party or just a squeak in a throng of voices, from where I’m sitting she’s one of the very few Republican activists going right now who is articulating this message, and making an effort to reach people with it.
Comment by Brad — 4/20/2009 @ 6:01 pm
One also gets the impression, by the way, that some of these things are things her father wished he could have said, but didn’t have the courage to (or, didn’t have the “political freedom” to, if you like). One can’t help but think that John McCain, too, might think Ann Coulter is a dumb bitch, Rush Limbaugh is wrong-headed, the GOP should stop bashing gays, the environment is a grave concern, single-issue voters are part of the problem, and gay marriage is really a pretty good idea. I bet he’s fairly proud of his daughter, and maybe a little jealous.
Which is another interesting angle.
Comment by Brad — 4/20/2009 @ 6:04 pm