Is this the campaign strategy of your candidate? Yes, probably.
It would be nice and less destructive of our society if a candidate were to deflect questions about another candidate and say something like: ‘Yes, Candidate X and I see things differently. I’m not interested is rehashing his plan. Let’s talk about mine. Here’s the specifics and here is the math.’
Number 1 campaign strategy of 2012 election.
Filed under Civil Society, Politics
“Ron Paul, for all his faults, is the only Republican who gives a damn about civil liberties and isn’t a neocon warmonger.”
– Bruce Barlett, 2011.12.23
Bruce Bartlett, former Reagan economics guru, 2008 Obama voter, and Ron Paul critic … that Bruce Bartlett.
I accept that Ron Paul will never be able to explain racist comments which appeared in some of his newsletters.
Racism is unacceptable to me. I reject all things racist. However, when I look at the 2012 election options: choices are slim — and that includes whether to vote for President Obama.
For now I will continue to support Ron Paul. He has 30 years of actual votes to consider. Maybe he has some darkness in his heart but when it comes time to vote he is one of the few to vote for liberty for all and to demand actual transparency in our government. … I would vote Huntsman given the chance but he will never appear on my ballot in Virginia so for now I will continue to support our crazy ol’uncle Ron Paul.
Politics makes for strangeness in life.
I am an idealist at heart but we need to admit that idealism doesn’t pay bills, protect your civil rights, guarantee balanced budgets, or prevent wars.
We need to move beyond voting for people that say that would do X, Y and Z given the chance. Inevitably most, once elected, vote the party line or flip due to some ‘new perspective’.
New perspective is good but when has President Obama ever had the backbone to use a veto when he threatened it? And when has he led from the front battlelines of an issue rather than at the 11th hour once the poll results are in?
As for Republicans, may God save us.
Gingrich would be darkness with a grandfatherly face. He would challenge the power of the courts to enforce laws, he would/has shutdown the government to make his point-of-the-day, and he is beholden to those that support him with contributions of hundreds of thousands or recently even a $20,000,000 contribution. Please don’t tell me that Gingrich is the answer. I will vote Obama first.
Perry. Am not voting Perry.
Santorum and Bachman – see Perry. All are social conservatives. If fear of racism is a qualifier for whom you vote then race-based policies are more likely to come from social conservatives than libertarians. Am not accusing any of racism, but since I am discussing Ron Paul and the prospect that racism is the boogeyman that we should fear in 2012, well my thoughts are as stated above.
John Huntsman – yes, could vote for him. He will not appear on Virginia’s state ballot so my remaining option is Romney.
Romney – I could possibly vote Romney but that is not a guarantee. Romney was generally a good governor of Massachusetts but he has repudiated much of what he achieved or previously believed. He is a serial flipflopper. Romney is an opportunist — although a good hearted opportunist. He means well. Yet Romney will veer significantly towards the right if that will get him votes. And he will veer back to the center too if that is where the electorate resides. I like the center, but I don’t like pandering veerers.
Ron Paul – while he is accused of having made racist commentary in his newsletters, he is one of the few to have voted against almost every law restricting our rights and freedoms. He did so when only several others in his party had to guts to vote for freedom in the face of fear after 9/11. He has been willing to buck his party on so many occasions that his American Conservative Union (ACU) rankings in the mid-2000s were so low that he qualified as one of the most liberal congressmen in the Republican party. Yes, he is America’s crazy ol’uncle. He says sometimes the most astounding, and upon repeated occasions, maybe even embarrassing things. But his heart is good and his proven action in voting has been predictable and for the greater good.
So yes, I continue to support Ron Paul in 2012. I do so somewhat contradictory to many of my ideals. But politics is about more than ideals. It is about working with the cards that you’ve been dealt.
2012 is a year of really, extremely bad choices. So my bad choice is Ron Paul … for now.
Filed under Uncategorized
Ezra Klein of The Washington Post has put out his 21 reasons Newt Gingrich won’t be the Republican nominee for president.
Klein is a good level-headed thinker. Gingrich is a trainwreck waiting to happen. When it happens will be very important. Timing matters. If early in the process then the GOP can pick up the fumble and keep moving. If later then it may be the equivalent of scuttling the GOP’s entire candidate fleet.
A Summary of GOP Reality per Klein: Romney’s Gingrich dirt file is likely a long, long file.
In the 8 weeks between New Hampshire and Super Tuesday Gingrich might win a few primaries, but can’t survive as frontrunner. He will and should take lots of hits from fellow GOPers.
Furthermore, if the Tea Party is serious about anything it has ever said it will join the anti-Gingrich fight.
If the Tea Party does not join the anti-Gingrich fight, or remains silent, it will be the equivalent of admitting that it is now nothing more than an quarrelsome GOP faction, but a GOP support group nonetheless … not that anyone really doesn’t already believe that.
As to the Tea Party’s independence, Tea Partyers have indeed bucked the GOP establishment to some degree. Yet there is not certainty that the Tea Party will take a stand on Gingrich. Maybe. Probably not. Almost every Tea Partyer elected in 2010 in also in danger at the polls and they must either coalesce into the party mainstream or splinter the party further. That reelection thing affects even Tea Partyers and they need every Republican win that they can muster if they want a chance at changing things to their liking.
For the GOP: Will Gingrich damage Romney badly enough that the GOP needs to find a new candidate to serve as their nominee? And would that candidate want to represent a party that is schizo.
We also should not forget how the Democrats plan to portray Gingrich.
He is his own caricature. Gingrich has a lot of explaining to do.
Filed under Politics, Republican Party, TEA Party
Back to the future: 1980 or 2012?
Filed under Election 2012, Republican Party, Taxes & Taxation
Tea Party Zombies Must Die! is a new online video game by Jason Oda of Starvingeyes Advergaming.
In Tea Party Zombies Must Die! you get to track down your favorite conservative and smash their brains in or kill them with a shotgun, an AR-15, a crowbar, an AK-47, etc.
Tea Party Zombies Must Die game opening screen
A screenshot of Sarah Palin as a zombie.
Tea Party Zombies Must Die! Sarah Palin as a zombie
Somehow if this game were called Leftist Liberals Must Die! I am pretty sure that we would hear no end of the outrage.
Filed under Civil Society, Political Violence, Politics
Newt Gingrich recently called President Obama ‘the food stamp president‘.
Yes, food stamp usage has gone up under President Obama. It has gone up by about 3,000,000 … the approximate number of people that lost jobs during the Great Recession during President Obama’s portion of the Great Recession.
Umm, ah … however, the record for the greatest growth in food stamps belongs to President George W. Bush.
There were 31.6 million Americans living in poverty in 2000. There were 37 million by 2005, an increase of 5.4 million. That number dipped slightly with the ever so mild economic growth of 2006 and then it hit the skids again in 2007, surging from 36.5 to 37.3 million within 12 months.
What? Doesn’t Gingrich know that we live in a world where you can easily check the numbers?
If you really look at the numbers closely, food stamp usage decreased every year between 1993-2000 and then began almost a constant upward ascent between 2000-2010 — the only jagged edges in these numbers were with the people on the wrong end of the economic magic wand.
The world is too serious to be taken seriously.
At face value, most serious discussion is often just a rationalized attempt to kneecap the opposing view.
Newt Gingrich is a good example. He introduced the catchphrase ‘Democratic thuggery’ into the lexicon back in 1994. I’m sure that others probably used it beforehand, but these were strong words from a Speaker of the House that then uttered the words ‘let us work together’.
I wonder how Newt Gingrich feels about thuggery now that in an off-moment he uttered the truth: right-wing social engineering is just as bad as left-wing. Yes, indeed.
Professor Gingrich seems to have separated his mind from that of his alterego: Georgia Bulldog … it was a fleeting moment but that can happen when you try to manage schizo views in a world where you need votes from all corners and must pander to just one if you are to stay in the game.
Newt the professor and Newt the politician never seem to learn from one another.
As for the right-wing social engineering — AKA ‘The Ryan Plan‘ — I actually like the basic idea of it. Unless Paul Ryan (R-WI) is just a trojan horse then the plan has merit.
The problem is that Paul Ryan is effectively a trojan horse, whether he wants to be or not. His plan skirts the boundaries of acceptance across political philosophic lines. If he were to commit to a trial run, triggers that reactivated Medicare coverage should the free market fail to either be competitive, efficient or provide services to all eligible Americans then we go show go with the Ryan Plan.
Reality though is that the overwhelming majority of Republican really just want to torpedo Medicare and could care less about the Ryan Plan. The Ryan Plan is effectively a trojan horse unless there is also a commitment to specific policies.
Dear Professor Gingrich, you have now met thuggery for your comments on right-wing social engineering. How does it feel? How does it feel to fall on the ideological unforgiving — sometimes unthinking — sword forged in the fires of 1994 which you created?
In a recent POLITICO interview, Newt Gingrich’s outlook was “If we get into a cycle where there are tea parties and there are conservative third-party candidates, we will make Pelosi speaker for life”.
A quote sure to make Newt himself a target of the rightwing: “… it’s equally clear that you can’t be a rightwing party and govern the country.”
So far the evidence behind Gingrich’s comments:
Look for independent candidate challenges in California, Kentucky and New Hampshire … and even more the closer we get to 2010.
Filed under Uncategorized
Newt Gingrich is held in less esteem than Sarah Palin. Among voters in general, and among Republicans.
His involvement in NY-23 was principled — he supported the primacy of the New York Republican party to pick its own candidates — but … Sarah Palin is now held in higher regard.
Per the most recent Gallup Poll, 33% of Americans would “seriously consider supporting” Sarah Palin for president. Only 29% would support Newt.
Within Republicana, Palin again beats Newt 65% to 60%.
Gallup found that Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney hold the edge, although their lead is so small as to be inconsequential.
Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-05-gop-poll_N.htm#table
This blog by Bill Golden, Bill4DogCatcher.com, an independent fed up with party politics but friendly to the concept of smaller government, maximum personal freedoms, Main Street over Wall Street, fiscal responsibility and community first.
Filed under Election 2010, Election 2012, Republican Party
Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) said earlier today that she shared former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s view that Republicans, now trailing Democrats and Independents in registration in many states, should back moderate to conservative Democrats in congressional districts and states where Republicans stand almost no chance of winning.
This is indeed a new Palin.
Sarah Palin should be congratulated for putting country before party.
Governor Palin views the electorate as embattled and fatigued by nonstop partisanship, and she is eager to campaign for Republicans, Independents and even Democrats who share her values on limited government, strong defense and “energy independence.”
It appears that she is joining her husband and son who are not Republicans, and are officially registered as “nonpartisan”.
This will put further pressure on the Republicans to become relevant.
Prediction:
If Sarah Palin follows through on this it will set back the Republican party 8-10 years in its efforts to reemerge as a national leader. This move would so strengthen the Blue Dog Democrats, who are currently doing a better job of being good conservatives than the majority of Republicans, that we could find ourselves once again in a land where you can be anything you want to be just so long as it is a Democrat … I’m not exactly predicting the generational reemergence of the Democratic party but Sarah Palin could contribute to that effect if she follows through. We’ll see.
For more info, see Washington Times article
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/12/palin-stump-conservative-democrats
