« The Voters’ Lobbyist Disclosure Enhancement Act of 2012
What Is It About Closeted Gay Republicans & Methamphetamine? »
Quote of the Day: Is the GOP About to Blow a Historic Opportunity?
Our political Quote of the Day comes from conservative blogger Betsy Newmark, who we have linked to often over the years. She has begun to fear that the GOP could be on the verge of blowing a historic political opportunity. She notes that Barack Obama is seriously on the political ropes and notes a few things that could improve for him. Then she writes:
Or, and this is his best hope, the GOP could nominate someone who would be so unappealing that he would make Obama look good. And that is what I’m afraid of. It makes me heartsick that, in an election year when things are looking so good to defeat Obama, the Republicans main choices are now between Mitt and Newt, neither of whom is all that appealing. Mitt’s weaknesses as a flip-flopper are well-known and the DNC is already trying to soften him up and perhaps take him out by putting up in key states an ad targeting him on abortion and Romneycare. It’s an ad that could be run by any of his GOP opponents. And that’s no coincidence. The DNC and Obama team are paying him the compliment by indicating he is the candidate they fear most.
But today Ron Paul launched an even more devastating attack on Newt Gingrich.
Romney must be so thankful to Paul for doing his dirty work against Gingrich.
History is full of “if only’s,” but gosh, think of what it would look like if Mitch Daniels or Paul Ryan had overcome their personal and family’s objections and run this year. Or Jeb Bush. Or Bobby Jindal. If Obama wins next year, I fear it will be due to GOP weakness rather than Obama’s own appeal. And that would be just a dang shame. I’m used to voting for the candidate who repels me the least, but I’m also full of daydreams about the “if only’s” that would have both made Obama’s path to reelection even more rocky and given us hope for much more promising future president in January, 2013.
Indeed: a Mitch Daniels, Jeb Bush or Chris Christie could have been virtually assured to peel off a good chunk of independent voter votes. Moreover, they are more “mainstream” Republicans to those Democrats who are NOT fond of their party’s high-profile liberal wing (you know, the wing that insists on quoting or watching the increasingly tiresome Bernie Sanders and the increasingly heavier Michael Moore ad naseum and that feels Occupy Wall Street news is the most vital, critical news on the entire planet).
There is room for a Republican who believes in good, old fashioned coalition building and who makes at least a perfunctory nod at the dying 20st century virtue of political consensus (we are in an era marked by pushes for political domination). One reason why Romney could be more a challenge to Barack Obama in a general election is that if he reverted a bit back to the old Mitt Romney who was a moderate Republican governor in the campaign he could make inroads among voters who are concluded that Obama is over his head. Of course, that would mean he’d lose some Republican conservative voters since Romney is now forever defined by his flip flops.
Conservatives don’t trust Romney. And neither do liberals. So perhaps he IS the consensus candidate..
But a Daniels, Jeb Bush (even with the last name as you know who) or a Chris Christie could have had some appeal. I suspect Ryan would flop with the general electorate since he seems like too much of a conservative icon: he is an acquired taste that many independents and Democrats have not yet acquired.
Romney has political baggage; Gingrich has his personal, financial and martial hubris — plus Gingrich traditionally starts sinking in polls when he makes his own opinion of himself and his perceived role in not just American history but the history of mankind apparent.
One thing Gingrich doesn’t have is a self-esteem issue.
But, then again, neither does Herman Cain..
8 Responses to “Quote of the Day: Is the GOP About to Blow a Historic Opportunity?”
We ended up with B.O. in 2008 due to two additional candidates in the primaries. H. Clinton and J. Edwards.
Why did this occur? Clinton and Edwards used negative ads against each other due to a history of votes in the senate and remarks during congressional sessions. They split the support for the center left, leaving B.O. who voted present about as many times as he vote for or against an issue. He said little during his short term in the senate and had few things that could be used against him in negative ads.
Now comes the Republicans who refuse to follow Reagans 11th commandment, using every little thing to demonize the front runners, leaving a nominee that will be cannon fodder for the Democrats to finish off. Herman Cain was the only one without a political history, so they came up with marital issues to use against home. Either Cain is one of the dumbist people on earth thinking these things would never come to light if they are true, or there needs to be changes made to our laws which severely punish anyone that makes up lies or misrepresents statements by taking things out of context during elections.
How can we ever find the best people to run for office when the opposition can find someone to say they had an affair with, distroy a persons professional and private life and not pay the price? I am not saying Cain may not have had this affair, but what keeps one from making up a story to eliminate a strong candidate, or at least make him weak. Had this affair gone on for 13 years, why was it not an issue when Cain ran for the senate in Georgia?
Romney, Gingrich or Obama, the top three qualified people in America to be President. REALLY?
The fact that the Republican base makes it nearly impossible for the party to nominate a “moderate” candidate who could appeal to independent voters is another reason why a centrist third party is needed. By capturing centrist Democrats, independents and moderate Republicans, a centrist third party could transform the political dynamic in Washington and move the country forward again. With the public’s approval rating for the two parties so low and the candidates for president so unappealing, once again it’s going to come down to voting for the lesser of two evils in the 2012 elections.
Paul Ryan wouldn’t have beat Obama. His proposals for Medicare would have been the death knell. They’re designed to not work.
The GOP base is dominated by short sighted cretins who have bought every 15 second talking point hook line and sinker. Its impossible for them to nominate a decent candidate. Huntsman is the best of the lot, and so of course he trails dead last. I used to think that it just seemed like the GOP was being really ignorant. That FOX news’s bought and paid for support of all things conservative didn’t really represent the GOP as a whole, that out there were still the voters that brought us Ronald Reagan and HW Bush, the last GOP presidents that knew what they were doing.
But this GOP primary has corrected my view. The party IS made up of education hating, nuance allergic, christian whites that can’t see past their own noses. It didn’t used to be this way, but it is now. Author is right, the GOP is blowing a huge chance to get back the Oval.
So here’s a speculative question: if the hard-right, Tea Party, litmus-testing GOP gets absolutely trounced in November 2012, a year when they should have won handily, will the party move towards moderation, or even MORE towards conservatism?
It will be fascinating. But only if they lose. If they win, it will be disastrous.
The Tea Party still working its magic on the GOP….
So much for the “boys in the back room” theory. Their influence can’t compete with all out fanaticism; even Miss Betsy has been indoctrinated to think Pres. Obama is beatable this time.
If the GOP ever recovers from the tea party which was serving moonshine, I would wager they’ll never try astro-turfing again.
Sorry, but the current slate of candidates ALL make Obama look good. The only exception is Huntsman– who has been punished by the base for making sense. Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Gingrich– how could anyone in their right mind treat them as serious candidates? Romney at least seems reasonably moderate but has all the charisma of a cardboard cut out.
I remember in ’08 no one believed that Obama would win the nomination or the election. He’s a good campaigner and has some accomplishments to tout– Don’t count him out.
Given this bizarre and discouraging collection of presidential wannabees what exactly is going to be the incentive for republicans to get out of the house and go vote? Will fear of the moderate who is in the White House now be enough reason?