tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7037030002547566426.post-71512427824702092202008-02-18T11:25:00.000-05:002008-02-18T11:25:31.084-05:00To continue the previous post that I follow up in <a href="http://www.vindy.com/weblogs/reason/2008/feb/12/voting-for-change/" target="_blank">my Vindy post last night</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/opinion/17rich.html" target="_blank">Frank Rich steps up to the plate and seconds some of my points</a>:<br /><blockquote>Mr. McCain could get lucky, especially if Mrs. Clinton gets the Democratic nomination and unites the G.O.P., and definitely if she tosses her party into civil war by grabbing ghost delegates from Michigan and Florida. But those odds are dwindling. More likely, the Republican Party will face Mr. Obama with a candidate who reeks even more of the past and less of change than Mrs. Clinton does. I was startled to hear last week from a friend in California, a staunch anti-Clinton Republican businessman, that he was wavering. Though he regards Mr. McCain as a hero, he wrote me: “I am tired of fighting the Vietnam war. I have drifted toward Obama.”<br /><br />Similarly, Mark McKinnon, the Bush media maven who has played a comparable role for Mr. McCain in this campaign, reaffirmed to Evan Smith of Texas Monthly weeks ago that he would not work for his own candidate in a race with Mr. Obama. Elaborating to NPR last week, Mr. McKinnon said that while he is “100 percent” for Mr. McCain and disagrees with Mr. Obama “on very fundamental issues,” he likes Mr. Obama and what he’s doing for the country enough to stay on the sidelines rather than fire off attack ads.</blockquote>Tylernoreply@blogger.com