Newt Gingrich – For some reason, probably having to do with meeting him in the 8th grade when he was my congressman, I appreciate Newt. He brings an intellectual perspective to the conversation, drawing on his keen understanding of American government. But his high-toned Conservative rhetoric about American political history so seldom gives way to his actual aspirations that in the debate I found myself forgetting he is actually in the race for president, rather than just commenting on it. It doesn't matter though. Even if he could make his case he wouldn't be able to leave behind his terribly-run campaign, his flip-flops on Libya and the Ryan budget plan, his statements about homosexuality and Obama's supposed anti-Colonial ideology, or even his bill at Tiffany's. And that's just the last year. With statements like, "I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."—this guy is just unelectable.
Ron Paul – My feelings haven't changed; I could never vote for Ronnie P, but gosh I love the guy. He's honest, principled, and dependable (or should I say 'predictable'). I even found myself nodding my head when he argued we should eliminate the liberty-killing TSA and let airlines handle their own security. But the next minute he's talking about how a fence on the Mexican border could be used not to keep illegal immigrants out, but Americans in, in the coming apocalypse. Good grief.
Michelle Bachman – I can't decide who is crazier, Michelle Bachman, or people who think Michelle Bachman has a shot at becoming president. The latter definitely annoy me more (although I suppose the group includes Michelle Bachman). Seriously, promising $2 a gallon gasoline if she is elected president? What's next, chocolate milk in the water fountains and all-day recess? If I have to hear one more time about how she wasted our time and money sponsoring a hopeless bill to repeal the recent health care legislation, I'm gonna look crazier then she did on the cover of Newsweek. Thank heavens Rick Perry has decimated what little following she had. Moving on...
Rick Perry – My initial reaction to Perry's candidacy was that he couldn't win because he was too similar to George W. Bush in the public consciousness. Now I think it's more his ideas. Sticking to your claim that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme is no way to win general elections. But I think the media is right, it's down to Perry or Romney at this point, and my guess is the Obama campaign is crossing their fingers hoping for Perry. The man is high on charisma and Tea Party cred, low on substance. But sometimes that's what it takes to win the GOP nomination. (By the way, the applause when Brian Williams mentioned that Perry had signed the order to execute 234 death row inmates was the most harrowing moment of the debate for me. How awful to applaud such things.)
Rick Santorum – Cricket... cricket...
Herman Cain – Herman Cain is the token crazy guy in a race that's already overflowing with crazies. Normally he would just provide comic relief, but as it is I wonder if the country really is going insane.
Herman Cain – Herman Cain is the token crazy guy in a race that's already overflowing with crazies. Normally he would just provide comic relief, but as it is I wonder if the country really is going insane.
John Huntsman – Ever since I read "Running for Grownup," a New York Magazine profile about the only two rational, qualified, pragmatic, mature, and measured candidates in the race (Huntsman and Romney), I have wondered why his poll numbers are so low. Now I know. He is a terrible communicator. His answers floated all over the map, half-hitting five talking points in answer to one question. If he has a message, beats me what it is. But this probably won't matter at the end of the day. Though I love him for it, Huntsman simply isn't Conservative enough for a party nomination that has been hijacked by the Tea Party. His stance against meaningless tax pledges, his belief in evolution and man-made climate change, his former job as Obama's (gasp!) ambassador to China, his support for increased legal immigration and civil unions and the EPA and... well, you get the picture.
(One interesting note: Santorum was the only candidate in the Reagan Library debate to support interventionist foreign policy. Every other Republican candidate is in favor of drawing down our military efforts and not entering new ones—a stark contrast from the '04 and '08 elections. It's interesting how the economy shapes political ideology on both sides of the aisle.)
(One interesting note: Santorum was the only candidate in the Reagan Library debate to support interventionist foreign policy. Every other Republican candidate is in favor of drawing down our military efforts and not entering new ones—a stark contrast from the '04 and '08 elections. It's interesting how the economy shapes political ideology on both sides of the aisle.)
Mitt Romney – My money's on Romney as the GOP's last best hope of beating Obama. The experience of having been around the block in '08 is showing, in my opinion. He seems more focused, more substantive, more solid, and more wise than he did four years ago. He refuses to bow to the Tea Party's every whim. He has a message, "the economy needs help and I can fix it," and he has an actual plan (in writing, I might add) to do so. He is able to place himself above the fray. After each candidate had a chance to take a swing at Rick Perry over his executive order to inoculate young girls against cervical cancer in Texas, Romney showed mercy and grace, saying everyone has things they would do differently if they had a second chance. At the same time, he emerged victorious in a spat with Perry over the Texas and Massachusetts economies, which is not an easy thing to do against a charmer like Perry (just ask Jon Stewart). He's not perfect (why he's sticking to his "businesses are people" line in the most populist cultural climate in decades I'll never know), but if there is a GOP candidate who can beat Obama next November, it's Romney or nobody.
But my guess is still nobody. The reason the candidates are so cooky this time around is because this is simply a bad year for a Republican looking to become president. I will admit that as the economy has grown slower than anyone expected and fears of a double-dip recession have increased (especially with Europe teetering on the the brink of crisis), my confidence that Obama will win next November has lessened. Economic crisis is the kryptonite of incumbent presidents (see Carter and H.W.) and we've certainly mired in a terrible one. I do not think Obama's jobs plan is going to have a drastic effect and I'm losing confidence that we're going to see a significant recovery in jobs or housing in one year. A Republican winning Anthony Weiner's vacated seat yesterday didn't bode well either. Still, Obama has a trophy case of legislative accomplishments, a boat-load of money, a not-horrendous approval rating, and a cast of cuckoo Conservative candidates on his side. I'm not hedging my bets just yet.
But I am getting excited.
Image: DonkeyHotey
But my guess is still nobody. The reason the candidates are so cooky this time around is because this is simply a bad year for a Republican looking to become president. I will admit that as the economy has grown slower than anyone expected and fears of a double-dip recession have increased (especially with Europe teetering on the the brink of crisis), my confidence that Obama will win next November has lessened. Economic crisis is the kryptonite of incumbent presidents (see Carter and H.W.) and we've certainly mired in a terrible one. I do not think Obama's jobs plan is going to have a drastic effect and I'm losing confidence that we're going to see a significant recovery in jobs or housing in one year. A Republican winning Anthony Weiner's vacated seat yesterday didn't bode well either. Still, Obama has a trophy case of legislative accomplishments, a boat-load of money, a not-horrendous approval rating, and a cast of cuckoo Conservative candidates on his side. I'm not hedging my bets just yet.
But I am getting excited.
Image: DonkeyHotey
Two thoughts:
ReplyDelete1) So your complaints against Ron Paul is that he isn't going to win. But your vote isn't going to count anyways? So vote with your preferences. And his comment about the fence is no less extreme then the warnings of our founding fathers.
2) So just who is Justin Scott voting for?
1) Nah, my complaint is I disagree with him on most issues and he's a little nuts.
ReplyDeleteMy vote does count, just not enough to persuade Libertarian economists. But that's why they know the price of everything and the value of nothing. ;)
2) Haha no way that's going on the internet.
Justin, do you think Americans would elect a Mormon? Obama should request Comedy Central to run that South Park episode on repeat.
ReplyDeleteHaha yes, I do. I think watered-down Mormonism is an easy substitute for the usual watered-down Christianity of the campaign trail.
ReplyDeleteI get that Hermann Cain is a bit catch-phrasy, but what did he say to earn the crazy label? I didn't hear anything that made me giggle nearly as much as Perry's fumble over how $5,000 isn't quite enought to buy him (or Paul's fence to keep Americans in)!
ReplyDeleteAnd regarding the executions applause, I'm with you. It was only one of many audience reactions that made me cringe.
Well I don't think he said anything in the debate that was crazy per se, just a little silly. If you want crazy, try this.
ReplyDeleteJustin,
ReplyDeleteOld friend here and I feel compelled to chime in on the Ron Paul commentary. I think his greatest difficulty is that he is not a great speaker and often struggles to bring clarity to his viewpoints and ideas. I appreciate his honesty and the fact his voting track record backs up every position he takes. To fully understand his ideas and to develop an appreciation for them, one must invest his own time in reading his books in which he clearly states his positions and his reasons for them. A lot of his ideas to the mainstream media and those that follow it come across as "kooky". However when you take the time to dig deeper and then look at his positions in context of where we find our country, it doesn't seem so "kooky". Though I've accepted there is no chance of his election I also am more convinced than ever that he is the one candidate who has the fresh ideas, the game changing ideas, that no one else dare even talk about. The real changes we need won't come from establishment candidates like Perry or Romney and certainly won't come from another 4 years of what we have now.
Jeff! It's great to hear from you, man. You need to bring the family up to DC sometime! You would love it.
ReplyDeleteI will always have a place in my heart for Ron Paul. He's a principled guy who you can bank on to always have a consistent view that maximizes individual liberty. I think you're right, the media is sometimes unfair in its portrayal of him as a nutjob. I do think his eccentricities are outweighed by his strength of character. But I have fundamental ideological disagreements with him, and I'm afraid much of the country does too. I don't think we'll ever see a Paul presidency, but I hope he remains a Senator for as long has he can. You're right, we need his third party, out-of-the-box perspective, if for no other reason than protect us from the groupthink of the two party system.