Republicans Blowing Their Big Chance
- Print print this page
- Discuss 14 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
So Mitt Romney, whom the media still insist on calling the "presumptive Republican nominee," has won the Iowa caucuses by a whopping eight votes.
The surprise of the evening (which everyone saw coming days ago) is that the person whom Romney beat by that molecule-thin margin was not Newt Gingrich, but was instead the former senator from Pennsylvania, Rick "For God's Sake Don't Google My Last Name" Santorum.
Santorum had the advantage of timing. This is a contest where every other member of the Republican Klown Kollege has gotten to be the front-runner for at least two weeks, until people actually got to hear them and they became a late-night TV punchline. (Gingrich got to do it twice.)
Santorum's "surge" came right before the caucuses, when people were desperate for a conservative, any conservative, to vote for. It was closing time at the GOP Bar, everyone else had turned out to be a dog, and Iowa conservatives were willing to squint and keep the lights turned low when they took Rick Santorum home.
It remains to be seen, however, how he'll look to them the morning after, when people who aren't completely off the deep end find out about some of the things he actually believes, such as:
Exceptions to abortion restrictions to protect the mother's health are "phony."
Insurance companies should be able to deny you coverage for pre-existing conditions.
We don't need food stamps or other programs to fight hunger, because there are fat people in America.
The smart money says no. Even if those positions don't turn off sane people, that dorky sweater vest might. I mean, really. Dude. A sweater vest? Seriously?
The news networks spent millions of dollars and hours upon hours of air time obsessively covering the Iowa caucuses, all the while telling us they don't really matter. The caucuses, they tell us, are nonbinding and have no effect on the delegate count. They are, in effect, a straw poll on steroids. The winner of the 2008 Iowa caucuses, they point out, was Mike Huckabee. The eventual nominee, Hon. John McCain, came in fourth. And so on.
What the media consistently ignore in all this cognitive dissonance is that the alleged importance of the Iowa caucuses is entirely their creation. It's one of the clearest examples of how 24-hour news coverage has warped and distorted the political process.
For instance, the day after her dismal showing in the supposedly meaningless caucuses, former front-runner Michele Bachmann dropped out of the race (an announcement that led to much wailing and gnashing of teeth by political humorists everywhere).
It looked for a moment like Rick Perry was going to bail out as well, but a Twitter message to his followers defiantly stated, "Here we come, SC! And Florida! And ... dang, I forgot the third one. Oops."
When confronted with the weakness of their candidate lineup, some Republicans insist that it really doesn't matter whom they run, because Obama is "worse than Jimmy Carter."
This is, on its face, absurd; there's no way, for example, to hang something like the millstone that was the Iran hostage crisis around the neck of the man whose administration presided over the death of Osama bin Ladin, the fall of Moammar Gadhafi and the end of the Iraq War.
In addition, while there's dissatisfaction with Obama on both sides of the aisle, the deep hatred required to motivate people to get out of the house and go to the polls for an "even a flip-flopping, unprincipled empty suit like Romney over Obama" vote is restricted to a few noisy wingnuts who think everyone's as angry and hateful as they are.
Ask John Kerry how well "sure, you don't trust me, but I'm not the other guy" worked for him.
But leaving that aside for the moment, the biggest problem with that desperate attempt at historical analogy is that the GOP doesn't have a Ronald Reagan to run against Obama.
Reagan was a charismatic candidate with a solid conservative record and a message of hope. The current right wing that runs the GOP has made "hope" a word to be mocked, and when it comes to charisma, these people are not only not Reagan, they're not even Dan Quayle.
The Republicans have their best opportunity in a long time to win the White House, and they're blowing it with lame candidates, inept campaigns and nasty infighting.
That's usually the Democrats' job.
Dusty Rhoades lives, writes and practices law in Carthage. Contact him at dustyr@ nc.rr.com.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 4 months ago
Man O Man (Cracks fingers) Dusty, my friend(wide grin) how much ammo can you pack into one small little article.
Lets skip the pleasantries and get straight to the point.
Since the founding of America there have been many differing points of view on how our country should be governed. The founders themselves quarrled over many issues, these quarrels eventually gave us the Bill of Rights. There has always been what we will denote as a "progressive" movement in our world, one which the United States was not immune to. Our founders understood the corruptibility of man, they understood much better then us the corruptibility of government having lived under King George.
Now Dusty that's just an insult to you im sure as you already new all that. However some may not and a little back ground is in order for this one.
Progressiveness took a U turn during the Enlightenment revolutions of Europe when it was combined with the "great thinkers" of that era. When attached to Utility, progressive-ism morphed into a type of political structure that would birth Socialism, and of course Communism. The thinkers did not necessarily envision the brutality that would be affixed to the last one since of course ideas themselves are harmless until given power by man. More history, of course this most of us would know because people that blog here generally do understand something of the Enlightenment period, for those that do not I suggest the University of Chicago's volume 1-9 on Europe. Now of course these were not necessarily brand new ideas however they were new in the sense of time when we understand that there had been very few governments or empires not run by one man or a body of few. What we do see is that no matter how great the idea, once the human factor entered, socialism and communism both failed. Not for the brilliance of the idea, but for the corruptibility and most importantly the free will of men. What we know about Obama is that he is a socialist.
Now why did I say all that? What does any of that have to do with Dusty's article,?
MY Rhoades, as you are aware, the reason we have primaries and caucuses is to pick the best candidate we can. Sometimes good candidates drop out for whatever reasons. The main thing is that during these primaries we get to VET our candidate to insure the best possible pick.
Of course you might not understand that part. Barak Obama was never VETTED. He got a pass by the media. There were of course people out there Vettting Obama but never in the main stream.
So now we now the strengths and weaknesses of all the candidates, as we say that Iowa does not matter, and in this case, New Hampshire does not matter unless huntsman can upset Romney, This seasons primaries will truly start in South Carolina, were a 3 way battle will take place between Newt, Santorum, and Perry, Whoever emerges as the best of the 3 will go on to battle Romney. And that is why we do this.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 4 months ago
But what begs the most attention? The plain fact is that Obama can not run on his record. Is that a bumper sticker? Sure is, but sometimes the truth can fit on a bumper. The Republican Party is just getting its toes warm in the water, what we do know is that whoever the nominee is, they will have nothing less then a cake walk to the white house unless there turns up a dead person in the trunk of their campaign bus, and maybe even then thanks to old teddy they could even get away with that.
Mr Rhoades America is not dumb, we fix our problems, we do not like socialism, we do not like the government doing what its not supposed to, we do not like the fact that our budget is higher then the total sum of world wealth at the turn of the 20th century, we do not like a president who despises our faith, our morals, our principles. We do not like a president who plays callous class warfare with our citizenry nor do we like a president who demonizes the very people who provide the means to which we live our lives. We are America Mr Rhoades and we will not sit ideally by as a man who promised us a deficit reduction of 5 trillion dollars by 2012, but instead increased it by 6, a man who promised us lower unemployment but now sits over a REAL unemployment rate of over 16 percent, a man who promised an era of civility, bipartisanship, accountability, and transparency, but who has blatantly proceeded in the most uncivil, partisan manner he can while throwing all accountability and transparency out the window and warping the laws of this great nation to allow for the first time ever the government of our country to determine weather or not we must purchase a product based on a Federal law.
No Mr Rhoades we are not blowing our chance, we are simply stretching before entering the ring and bludgeoning Mr Obama with a large steel bat.
Yukonjohn 1 year, 4 months ago
As of today, the unemployment figures are getting better. That is going to hurt the Repubs. There is only one answer: Ron Paul 2012!!!
SH59 1 year, 4 months ago
Wdd said "I'd bet there are lots of high school and college kids that would have loved to have had some of those jobs this last summer." You're kidding yourself if you think that today's kids are able to work long hours in the hot sun picking tobacco or tomatoes to the point of exhaustion and for little pay. Those jobs are available to any American but the problem is no one wants to do the work. Make illegals legal to work and they would pay their taxes and the work will still get done.
dustyrhoades 1 year, 4 months ago
Actually, ADP payroll service's employment report is even better:
http://www.adpemploymentreport.com/
ADP today reported that employment in the U.S. nonfarm private business sector increased by 325,000 from November to December on a seasonally adjusted basis. The estimated advance in employment from October to November was revised down slightly to 204,000 from the initially reported 206,000. The increase in December was the largest monthly gain since last December 2010 and nearly twice the average monthly gain since May when employment decelerated sharply.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/business/economy/us-adds-200000-jobs-unemployment-rate-at-8-5.html?pagewanted=2&_r=3&hp
ADP’s reports do not always correlate with the Labor Department’s findings, but they can provide additional insight. Diane Swonk, an economist with Mesirow Financial, said most of the new jobs in the ADP report were at small businesses and that generally only newer small businesses use a payroll company. “It’s one of those things where you look at that and say, ‘That would be really cool if that continues,’ ” Ms. Swonk said. “It’s not just small business — it’s new business formation.”
This is good news for the country and should encourage anyone who cares about it. But I don't expect that will stop the people who are determined to run America down and refuse to credit any good news, purely for partisan political gain.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 4 months ago
The U -6 unemployment figure which is the only one that matters is about 16 to 17% currently and will rise to 18% in february, the U - 3 number which is the one reported is at 8.5% however if you take that number at what the work force was in 2009 the number would be 11%
No Mr Rhoades again you are wrong.
dustyrhoades 1 year, 4 months ago
The U -6 unemployment figure which is the only one that matters
It only matters to you because it discredits the POTUS. Exactly as I said. 200-300 thousand new jobs are created, and you refuse to call that good news.
As Ronnie Reagan said: "There you go again."
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 4 months ago
I am glad for every job created in this country. What I do understand is that we are not..trending forward as economists on main stream tvs would have us believe. We are at an actual rate in the U3 of 11 percent which will return to 12 or 13 in february and 16 percent in the U6 ungrading to 18 percent in february.
Moore county is a great example with actual unemployment at over 16 percent.
Thats almost 1 in every 5 people out of a job right now folks. now do the math.
dustyrhoades 1 year, 4 months ago
jpb: can you discuss the specific section of the National Defense Authorization Act that you claim gives the President the power you claim it does? Because despite the yelling coming from Glenn Greenwald and the ACLU it''s fairly ambiguous. I;m thinking in particular of the language that " “The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States" and that it does not change existing law “relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”
Also keep in mind that in order to veto that, the President would have had to veto the entire military budget.
Thatcher 1 year, 4 months ago
I'm so thankful you told us which Republicans were bad, and which were OK. I guess you'd vote for neither. And your concern that Republicans are "Blowing It," I take it you want them to win? Or perhaps you dislike conservatives/Republicans and want them to lose. It really is funny watching liberals try to pick our nominee! But you are a funny guy!
Yukonjohn 1 year, 4 months ago
As it is working out, Dr. Rep. Paul's message is getting out to more and more people and making sense to them!! I am just watching the Repubs in NH getting ready to go to the polls. Hopefully for our Nation, Ron Paul will do very well. Even if he does not get the nomination, the Repubs will have no choice but to discuss his platform (different than all the rest) in a responsible manner. What part does America dismiss? Foreign policy, I for one along with many military personnel, are tired of being the world's policeman. The drug policy, who amongst us thinks this is working? Economics? How many think printing more money, and large govt. is the answer? These and many other questions are needing to be answered, and now maybe they will be at least addressed.
geoffcutler 1 year, 4 months ago
I must say, it takes integrity to maintain during the primaries foreign policy positions like Ron Paul's. There is alot to be said for that type of principle. But it's a losing position and makes Paul unelectable.
dustyrhoades 1 year, 4 months ago
Rick Santorum actually had a good observation Sunday morning: the things that Republicans like about Dr. Paul he can't do; the things that worry Republicans about him he can do right away."
dustyrhoades 1 year, 4 months ago
Back to the NDAA for a moment: the sections on detention are poorly written and probably unconstitutional (I say probably because they're so ambiguous in some respects). Unfortunately, since they were inserted as a poison pill into the legislation that funds the entire military, it would have been literally dangerous, not just politically, to veto the Act. There needs to be either (a) a court challenge both on fourth and fifth amendment grounds but on separation of powers grounds, because the Act, in some respects, actually LIMITS the President's power by mandating military prosecution for certain suspects, and/or (b) legislation specifically aimed at repealing the offensive sections.
I see a possibility for that under an Obama administration and a Democratic congress; none at all under any of the current GOP candidates.
The_AnonymusProfit 1 year, 4 months ago
Dusty can you clarify what you are asking JPB maybe I can better answer it. Harleyman, no one takes anything you say seriously so thanks for stopping in.
Courseaire 1 year, 4 months ago
This just in: "Last night, Ron Paul went for a late evenning walk & was missing for several hours. He was later found sitting on a park bench feeding bread crumbs to a bunch of pigeons, talking to someone that wasn't there. He was asked if he was OK, and he replied, 'I'm going to be President when I grow up."
TOYTIME 1 year, 4 months ago
When Romney is the nominee he should immediatly start courting Dr. Condi Rice to be veep. You would have regionally balanced ticket as well as an ideologically balanced ticket. That would be something to see, imagine Dr. Rice debating either Biden or Hillary, I would love to see that.
Yukonjohn 1 year, 4 months ago
ToyTime, While I agree that Dr. Rice is an incredibly brilliant lady, this is a losing ticket. There is no way Mitt is going to beat President Obama. With the figures starting to show the recovery picking up speed, he is going to waltz into the office once again. This is a horrible situation for our Great Nation, but one I feel sure is going to happen. I am not sure if our Nation can survive another term of Barrack Obama, but it looks like we are going to have to try.
TOYTIME 1 year, 4 months ago
Hang in there Yukonjohn, mittens is not my first choice either, and I agree on just about every issue I've heard Paul talk about, in theory, however he would be the only Libertarian fighting against Republicans and Democrats and would not get anything done, and thats just talking about domestic issues don't even get me started on his isolationist views. He would be at odds even with his Foreign Relations Commitee Chairperson if we were to win the senate back. I've said before, on these boards, My choice would have been Dr. Rice. She would be the American Thatcher!!! OWS was constructed to push the narrative against Mitt, problem is everyone is tired of them. The people who care know it and I think the deconstruction of the myth that is Obama will be something to watch. A billion dollars can push a lie a long ways, but the American people are catching on.