Is John McCain like George H.W. Bush?
Ross Douthat raises a point I’ve been thinking about as well. As content-free as John McCain’s campaign has been to date, so was George H.W. Bush’s, and he turned out to govern in a completely different manner than he campaigned (and I don’t care what Charles Pierce says, I’ve very glad Bush was president between 1989 ...
Ross Douthat raises a point I've been thinking about as well. As content-free as John McCain's campaign has been to date, so was George H.W. Bush's, and he turned out to govern in a completely different manner than he campaigned (and I don't care what Charles Pierce says, I've very glad Bush was president between 1989 and 1992 rather than Dukakis). Actually, the McCain/H.W. Bush comparisons go deeper than that: They were both pilots who were shot down in wartime; They both had decades of Washington experience; They are more interested in foreign policy than domestic policy; They both are lousy public speakers They both lost a close primary to a more ideological two-term president eight years before they became the GOP nominee; They both made dubious selections for their VP candidate; The thing about analogies, however, is that it's easy to find the parallels and harder to find the contrasts. So I'll put this to readers -- in what ways is John McCain not like George H.W. Bush. The most obvious difference to me is are their foreign policy approaches and their temperment. What am I missing? UPDATE: MSM takes on the question of whether McCain's campaign would mirror his governance style. The Washington Post's Ruth Marcus says yes. Over at the New York Times Campaign Stops blog, David Brooks offers this hopeful contrast: "McCain would run an administration totally unlike his campaign. It would be a series of commissions run by the old establishment types McCain likes doing business with — Hillary Clinton, Alan Greenspan, Henry Kissinger, etc."
Ross Douthat raises a point I’ve been thinking about as well. As content-free as John McCain’s campaign has been to date, so was George H.W. Bush’s, and he turned out to govern in a completely different manner than he campaigned (and I don’t care what Charles Pierce says, I’ve very glad Bush was president between 1989 and 1992 rather than Dukakis). Actually, the McCain/H.W. Bush comparisons go deeper than that:
- They were both pilots who were shot down in wartime;
- They both had decades of Washington experience;
- They are more interested in foreign policy than domestic policy;
- They both are lousy public speakers
- They both lost a close primary to a more ideological two-term president eight years before they became the GOP nominee;
- They both made dubious selections for their VP candidate;
The thing about analogies, however, is that it’s easy to find the parallels and harder to find the contrasts. So I’ll put this to readers — in what ways is John McCain not like George H.W. Bush. The most obvious difference to me is are their foreign policy approaches and their temperment. What am I missing? UPDATE: MSM takes on the question of whether McCain’s campaign would mirror his governance style. The Washington Post‘s Ruth Marcus says yes. Over at the New York Times Campaign Stops blog, David Brooks offers this hopeful contrast: “McCain would run an administration totally unlike his campaign. It would be a series of commissions run by the old establishment types McCain likes doing business with — Hillary Clinton, Alan Greenspan, Henry Kissinger, etc.”
Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and co-host of the Space the Nation podcast. Twitter: @dandrezner
More from Foreign Policy
Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.
The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.
Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.
How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
