I don’t see how McCain would have done much differently on Libya other than maybe intervening a few months earlier-I don’t see him calling for boots on the ground or an occupation. Similarly with Syria, Senator McCain’s been calling for arming the rebels and that sort of stuff not sending in the Marines.
No. According to that cite, Bush increased spending by $700 billion in his second term, the same as Obama did in four years. The Republican argument is that Obama ballooned the defecit because of massive spending. But that doesn’t work out, even when you look at the absolute numbers.
I think looking at the budget in terms of percentages is a better way than absolute numbers. Almost every president increases the spending of their predecessor, and if you look at historical figures, their is a clear trend of increased spending over time. This is due to an increasing population, a growing economy, and inflation. I think it’s absurd to think that absolute numbers hold much meaning in this context.
To be fair, I don’t think that’s McCain. So what would probably happen is that the party would split between conservatives (“moderates” or “pragmatists”) and radicals (“conservatives”): McCain and some of the GOP would be trying to fix things if only so that the party looks competent, while others would be trying to make them worse for either ideological or diabolical reasons.
With Obama vs. the GOP we got a dangerous confluence of interests between Starve the Beast ideology and partisan politics. Those interests would be split with a McCain presidency. (Granted, this is not an argument for having elected McCain so much as one for not giving the right wing a congressional majority in 2010.)
Keep in mind that Republicans are only jumping on the bandwagon now that Obama’s Libya policy is too obvious a success to deny. When he was actually initiating it, conservatives were adamantly opposed to any American involvement in Libya.
So what would have been different under a McCain administration?
- McCain would have gone along with the conservatives in his party and not gotten involved in Libya.
- McCain would have broken with his own party and sided with the Democrats.
- The conservatives wouldn’t have opposed American involvement in Libya if McCain was President instead of Obama.
- The issue never would have come up. Under a McCain administration there wouldn’t have been any “Arab spring” movement.
I’m curious to see a conservative spins this.
I wouldn’t see that happening. Roberts, Alito, and Thomas are 57, 62, and 63 - they’ve still got plenty of years ahead of them. The oldest conservative on the court is Scalia, who’s 76. But let’s face facts. There’s no way in hell anyone could persuade Antonin Scalia to step aside for somebody else. They’re going to have a tough time convincing him to retire when he dies.
Republicans are (and were) of two minds on the Arab Spring revolts-the more moderate and “interventionist” Republicans (like MCCain wanted to be more aggressive in Libya and now Syria but the Tea Partiers and the libertarians adamantly opposed all intervention. I think it’d be a mix of 2 and 3 (less conservatives would oppose it but probably more liberals would be opposed to it) or 4 not because of McCain being President but due to indirect causes resulting from him being elected.
Is this even an option? I assume that McCain might have supported Mubarak more strongly and perhaps would have stayed out of Libya, resulting in diferent outcomes, but I can’t see the Arab Spring not happening at all.
Well one thing’s for damn sure, if McCain were elected the Feds wouldn’t be trying to curb the highly questionable efforts the Republicans are making at voter suppression in the various states.
Butterfly effect and all that. It’s hard to prove something would have been inevitable if history had changed.
As an example, let’s say McCain had been more committed to maintaining a larger American military presence in the Middle East than Obama was. And let’s say that regimes in the Middle East used this larger American military presence as a rallying point, feeding their people propaganda that all Muslims had to stick together against foreign oppressors. As a result, popular opposition was muted and the existing regimes in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen all remained in power.
Since over half of President McCain’s term would be over, we would have a new Vice President by now. 
For a second, I read that as McCain dying halfway through, and Palin becoming president and thus having a VP fill in. And that wasn’t a 
worthy comment.
Well, Obama seems to have aged a lot more than four years since taking office . . . It is possible McCain would not even have survived on the job this long.
Best bumper sticker I saw last year during her flirting-with-running phase: PALIN IN 2012-2014 1/2!