As my vision has slowly improved over the last two months, I find that I am seeing things in a different light. That does not necessarily mean that I am seeing thing more CLEARLY. You should take that both literally and figuratively. So, with that disclaimer in mind, I plan to write a series of articles under the banner “Seeing Things in a Different Light”, Today I would like to provoke a discussion on the 2012 elections.
The Republican Party
Can anyone tell me what the Republican Party (RP) stands for today? I ask this question because I, for one, am confused. The RP is controlled by an elitist establishment group who want and support Big Government with only slightly different aims from those of the Democrat Party.
We “conservatives” often refer to this establishment group as RINOs. But, dear friends, these people are not Republicans In Name Only. They are the Real McCoy Republicans and always have been. It is we who want a smaller less costly federal government who are the true RINOs. It is we who want to change the RP to fit our image of what it should stand for.
Within the RP we have various groups. There are hard core Neo-Cons, and Social Conservatives and hard core constitutionalist ( like me) and there are moderate conservatives and there libertarians. (Many of these groups overlap to be sure.)
If my discription of the make-up of the RP is correct, we are hard pressed to define what the Party stands for. We are reduced to referring to the RP as having two parts: the establishment Republicans and the conservative Republicans. As a result, the Republican Presidential Primaries have been a duel between the establishment candidate, Romney, and the wannabe conservative alternative. Let’s take a brief look at those wannabe conservatives.
The Conservative Alternatives to Romney
The first conservative alternative to rise above the crowd was Michelle Bachmann. The MSM did away with her in short order.
Then came Herman Cain. He scared the hell out of the Democrats. Therefore, Axlerod and company wasted no time in destroying Mr. Cain.
Next up was Rick Perry. The MSM and the Democrats didn’t have to lift a finger to bring down Rick Perry. He was perfectly capable of doing the job himself.
Then came Newt Gingrich. Probably the best thing I can say about Newt is that he is more conservative than Romney. But, this self proclaimed Reagan Conservative is dragging a whole freight train of baggage. Besides, Axlerod and Company would make Mr Moon Colony wish he had never entered the race.
We also have Rick Santorum competing. Santorum seems like a nice guy and a solid conservative. Unfortunately he is getting very little support so far. Short of a miracle, I expect that Santorum will drop out after Super Tuesday.
What about Ron Paul? Most of us who have supporyed Ron Paul are under no illussion that he is going to be the Republican nominee. But he will go to the convention with a number of delegates and the the Repuplican Party and the nominee had better treat him right. I will have more to say about this in a moment.
Electability
There is still an outside chance tha Gingrich could get the nomination. But a betting person would likely put their money on Romney to be the Repulican challenger to the incumbent, Obama.
We have been told time and time again that Romney has the best chance to defeat Obama in November. We ar told that by the Republican establishment, by the MSM and, by the Democrat Talking Heads. On top of that, the polls are telling us the same thing. Me, I take a contrarian view.
Obama and Axelrod & Company have been planning their campaign since last summer arround Mitt Romney. Their entire class warfare language was designed for Mitt Romney. They plan to use Obama’s bully pulpit to make this an election of the poor versuus the rich. And guess what? They have been planning since last summer to make Romney their poster boy in this class warfare election. And, because Romney has a serious case of foot-in-mouth desease, they will take advantage of each expression of this debilitating affliction. In my opinion, they have at least a 50% chance of being successful.
What must the Republicans do to win in November?
- They must be laser focused on making this contest about Obama’s record and not fall into Obama’s trap to make this a class warfare contest. This will be difficult to say the least.
- They must also be laser focused on their very specific plans tp energize the economy and thereby create jobs and on specific plans on how they intend to reform and save the entitlement programs,
- This is where I bring Ron Paul into the equation. Republicans must understand that this election is not about Republicans versus Deomocrats. This election is between those who want four more years of Obama and those that don’t. Of the electorate that want to vote against Obama. Ron Paul followers make-up about 15%. Romney and the RNC will have to find a way to appease Paul followers and get them on board. How they can do this I do not know. If they fail in this effort, the disenchanted Democrats that are following Paul will probably stay home and the Libertarians in that 15% will probably cast protest votes foe Gary Johnson. IMHO, the Republicans can not win with out the support of Paul’s 15% of the anti-Obama electorate.
Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?
Asylum Watch 
I think you’re right about Romney and electability. It is a myth. It’s easy to cast your support for a guy when you are polled. Very different is going out and voting for the man. Romney just doesn’t have that excitability about him because he doesn’t stand for anything. He’s an empty suit. Obama is the same thing.
So why is Romney being shoved down our throats? Because the only other candidate that has a good chance against Obama scares the hell out of the Republican establishment. Yup, Ron Paul. His polling numbers are right there with Romney. Do we hear about that in the media? Nope. All we hear is that he is a kook, unelectable, etc. It’s all asinine. I don’t watch the news anymore, and I tend to avoid talk radio when they get into politics. It has made car rides boring, but at least I don’t have to listen to propaganda all the time.
Hope everything’s going well, Jim. I’m glad to hear that the eyesight is getting better.
Tony!!! Man I thought you fell of the edge of the earth. I am so glad to hear from you, Tony. I hope this means you are blogging again.
You are right that Paul is not getting any coverage by the MSM. If those poll numbers ever show themselves in a primary or a caucus, they will have to pay attention to Ron Paul.
Maybe sometime in the near future. I have been bogged down by grad school applications and coming up I have interviews three weeks in a row. Should be a hectic time as I’m also teaching a busy class and writing a paper on microscopy.
It’s not to say that I don’t have some extra time. I do. I guess I just got discouraged after a while. That and my muse has seemingly left me. Ideas about what to write did not seem to come to my head as frequently, and it seemed that I spent more time pondering what to write rather than actually writing. It may also be that my interests have grown past just politics now. I have been lately reading much on religion and philosophy also, and these fields wouldn’t seem to mesh well with the political blog (though I could spin it if I tried hard enough).
In the meantime, I’ll keep following your blog (and probably stumping for Paul where applicable).
I think that you are right about almost everything Jim, I think that you are a little too quick to discount Santorum. Gingrich is dropping and Rick Santorum is starting to rise some. It is still early. He is polling better than Romney against Obama and with Gingrich dropping people are starting to take a closer look at him. He is way ahead in Missouri and if he wins there, it would give him a big boost. I think that we will get a better look at the end of all this whether there are enough conservatives to make the difference, but I also think that there are some blue dog democrats who will be coming our way. Either that or they will stay home!
You may very well be right, Patricia, that Santorum’s star is about to rise. However, as long as there are three anti-Romney candidates, I think Romney will keep winning deligates. This will be especially true after Super Tuesday and Texas are out of the way. But this year it seems anything is possible.
I agree, there is a chance that Santorum could win two of the three constests today and if that happens it may propel him into the spotlight as the only alternative to Mitt Romney.
I tend to agree with Patricia on Santorum. I would place about 40% odds on him winning the nomination at this point. Slight edge to Romney, but only slight. In the most recent polls, Santorum is ahead of Romney in Michigan–which is big. As for Paul, I’m deeply skeptical that he or his supporters will play a part in this election. All of the data that I have seen suggests that his actual GOP support is well below 15%. It looks more like 7%-10% depending on the state, which is why Paul is focusing on caucuses and open primaries, rather than closed primaries. Polls also suggest that most of his hardcore supporters will not vote GOP unless he is on the ticket. This pretty much means he can safely be ignored by the other candidates–which is exactly what they are now doing.
You know I have come out in support of Ron Paul and I know your feelings on Paul. I have long ago accepted that Paul is not going to get the nomination. Of the remaining candidates, I like Santorum best; but, my gut tells me he is not ready for prime time and Romney will most likely end-up with the nomination.
I think you are wrong, John, that the GOP can afford to ignore Ron Paul and his followers. They will do so at their peril.
Hi Jim….thanks for your always interesting perspectives. I just want to address the “Mr. Moon Colony” idea. In 1962, as I recall, people thought Kennedy was reaching too far with the moon expedition idea. Turned out well. I have read articles about some minerals worth retrieving from the moon, something the U.S. should not give up. I personally believe we should have declared it U.S. territory when we got there. Gingrich has said he is interested in the “prize” incentive idea of getting us back in the space business….which I think is a great idea. Obama has (O)bominated NASA, as he has everything else. I don’t think “Mr. Moon Colony” was wrong or off base to bring the idea to public attention. But 50% of the public is only concerned with their entitlements, so why would they care if we compete for valuable space resources? (rhetorical question) Obama’s billions $$$ will attempt to destroy anyone we decide we want…and Romney is playing the same game going after his competition. “Mr. Moon Colony” and Santorum would make a good ticket…but we aren’t going to get that. Leaving you with a link to an article on Moon opportunities: http://alfin2100.blogspot.com/2010/10/lunar-x-prize-drives-private-race-to.html
Glad you are back!!! Take care!!
I don’t have any problem with enterprise doing whatever they like. But don’t you think Newt went a little over the top when our country is broke?
You are spot on, IMO. Though I would say anyone but Romney. He reminds me of a borg, and I hate borgs. I think we need to keep our eye on the real prize. and only chance. Super majority GOP in the Senate, and real GOPers in the House of the likes of the Tea Party folks. We must keep control of the Supremes if we are to have any chance at a rebirth. We must, no second chances. We are down to one vote for the most part.
I certainly understand the “anyone but Romney” sentiment. Maybe Santorum will surprise us but I don’t know how he can do it without money.
If a majority of Americans believe that Obama is deserving of a second term, no matter who he runs against, then there’s no hope for the country.
What scares me, Bob, is the number of ignorant ill-informed people that vote.
Bob Mack you have it spot on! I was just talking to my dad about why would anyone who is thinking want to vote for Obama. I don’t get why his approval rating keeps vacillating 5% points. Seriously, you either like the job he is doing or you don’t. I think that most Americans don’t have any principles, have no clue how to think, and no clue what to think.
And this post is spot on, and will only continue to get more applicable. Most of us Ron Paul supporters are MAD AS HELL at both parties. It’s not about Ron Paul, it’s about the idea that government is to big and needs to stop spending money it doesn’t have. Ron Paul could drop off the face of the Earth, but us people, especially those of us 30 and under, are not going away anytime soon, and we are only growing in numbers!!!
Bill of Rights, thanks for stopping by and joining the conversation. If the Republican Party ignores the Paul supporters, it will be at their own peril.
Ron Paul is the only candidate that is a true constituionalist concerned with preserving our personal liberties. Saying that makes me angry–because ALL of our elected officials swear to preserve and protect the constituion and only a handful live up to it–or even give it more than lip service. Having said that, the Republican Party MUST make the election about Obama. Period. The only candidate I truly would hate to have to vote for is Gingrich. Sorry, I believe Gingrich is more big government and less conservative than Romney. And he’s bullheaded and quick to anger. I don’t see good things with a Gingrich presidency.
So happy to see you out and about Jim! I figured the monitor glare was cooking your eyeballs – it does mine and I don’t have vision problems – not yet.
The bottom line is Goldman Sachs, they contribute heavily to both Romney and Obama. That’s all I need to know. If Romney is the nominee, I predict a forcible third party factor, because enough is enough.
Thanks, rM. It’s nice to be back in the saddle at least sort of.It does look like the banksters will win and America will lose.
You know my response, rM – Gary Johnson! It’s early, so I’m still optimistic!
I’m glad you are back Jim and I think this post is right on. It’s like you never missed a beat. I voted for Santorum in the New Hamspshire primary and it looks like he might do very well tonight and that is exciting because we need an alternative to Mitt and Newt.
Thanks, Steve. It’s great to be back in the swing of things.
I like Santorum but I wonder if he can raise the money to keep going.
Ron Paul voters will drift over to the Libertarian party or back to the democrat party. I see very little difference between Newt, Mitt and Rick. All big statists, each with his own unique twist. I’m ignoring the primary and will hold my nose and vote for whoever gets the nod.
Your assessment of the GOP is spot on. I only ask that those who are demoralized follow the example of liberals. Even demoralized, they always turn out to vote against their political enemies.
Good to read your wise words again, Jim. Welcome back!
I hope you’re wrong about the Paul backers, Silver, because I don’t see how the GOP can win without them.
BTW, I can’t seem to post a comment at your site. I’m having the same problem at AOW’s place.
Jim, your recent vision issues have not dimmed your ability to discern the political situation one bit. I agree with your view of the GOP. We seem to be an exception, rather than the rule.
Thanks, Matt. It’s good to hear from you. You are right! It is not a pretty picture we see, is it?
Damn I wish Paul Ryan had jumped in to this mess. The good news is that even if Romney is “inevitable” based on support by establishment Republicans and money in the bank, he’s already being pushed to the right. He’s talking about capitalism creating prosperity, and the need to re-establish liberty (reduce the size and scope of government). He has also promised to sign legislation repealing Obamacare.
Is anyone happy with our slate of candidates? No. I find fault with every one of them. However, I do not find nearly as many faults as I do with Obama. Just having someone in the White House that understands that it is the private sector that produces the wealth in the country, not the freaking government, would be a positive change.
I’ve said it before… The president has the bully pulpit, but he can only suggest legislation, or sign legislation. He is also in charge of managing the bureaucracy (the executive branch). With a conservative Senate and House, the president (a Republican president) can be moved to the right. He’ll sign conservative legislation, because if he doesn’t he’ll never get re-elected. With that in mind, we need to put focus on the Senatorial elections, and the House contests.
The thing I like best about Romney (I’m not exactly on his bandwagon, or anyone’s for that matter) is that he does have experience successfully turning things around with executive leadership… he has FIRED bad managers and workers in order to right a sinking ship. What he did at the Olympics tells me he can do that in a highly bureaucratic environment. If he just signed the conservative legislation set before him, continued to speak about the strength of capitalism and liberty, and got the damned bureaucrats at the EPA, NLRB, DoE, Education, etc. fired where necessary and moving in the right direction, he could be very successful and we might end up pretty satisfied.
What we need to know is whether or not he has the chops to not only defend himself from the Obamacons’ class warfare attacks, but to turn it around and taut the virtues of capitalism as opposed to the cronyism and statism that fails wherever it is tried, including in the last four years. Can he point out the phony stats (jobs created by Obama) and make people understand the truth? Can he point out the miserable budgetary mismanagement of the Dems (three years with no budget? A one-off stimulus becoming the baseline for spending? Spending a trillion dollars more than you take in for four years in a row?) No matter who we nominate, they have to do those things.
It is not just that I don’t like Romney. I really believe he is the easiest candidate for Obama to beat.
Jim, fabulous to see you writing again. Since the conversation here is well-developed, I’ll just say that one of our candidates must make it to the WH. Romney is on the very bottom of my list. Santorum and Bachmann were on the top. I’m voting for the Republican nominee because we must move Obama out.
When I hear Libertarians and Independents say they will either stay home or vote for Obama I am puzzled by Libertarianism and what one is independent about.
I was all for “taking the party back.” As you you say, we’ve never had a party truly immersed in republicanism, but think about it – we’ve only in recent years begun complaining. Most had not realized (for decades) that the Constitution was mortally wounded. We sent someone to Congress and thought they were “constitutional.” We went about our business.
We went wrong when allowed American History in the classroom to be perverted. If we can’t fix that, we can’t fix this.
Now we know, and it may be too late if we can’t hold our nose and help ANYONE in the GOP take the White House.
Maybe next time around, Libertarians can get their message out louder, but I’m hoping someone here can explain why a Libertarian will vote for Obama or stay home? In our current situation, how could a voter do that?
As long as the voter sees Paul as doing away with SS, he can’t win. Reform – definitely. With the number of Hispanics in this country who have fled communism, Paul can’t win by saying he will trade with Cuba. Today his position on Iran and the bomb is hard to swallow. His position on Israel is untenable for me. Otherwise, I would be knocking doors for Paul.
We must have another party – one sworn to defend and follow and resurrect the Constitution, as much as possible at this late date – finding a way to live with the essentials like SS under reform, and avoiding total isolationism, supporting democracies, NEVER a country that enslaves their own people. When totalitarians attacks us – we attack back, swift and mighty, come back home and continue making our military so fearsome, we won’t be attacked again. I am not forgetting the issue of oil and Pakistan’s bomb.
Those are my priorities in this current situation. Who running today will do that? I think there are a few. If we get another chance, we’ll have a lot of feet to hold to the fire while we build a completely new party.
Naggie, thank you for the kind words and thank you so much for your thoughtful comment.
I can not speak for the Libertarians or the other followers of Ron Paul. But, here is what I think.
The Ron Paul followers represent 15 to 20% of anti-Obama electorate. The GOP and the Republican nominee desperately need these people to vote in November for that nominee. That will only happen if Ron Paul at the convention in Tampa, comes out and enthusiastically supports the nominee. I’m guessing that will only happen if the RNC and the nominee embrace Paul and his followers by giving Paul a significant voice the writing of the platform and I am also guessing he may want a voice as to who will fill one or two cabinet positions if the nominee becomes President. I repeat, the only way Paul followers will vote for the Republican nominee is if Paul enthusiastically the nominee all the way to November.
If the RNC does not accommodate Paul and his followers in Tampa, the libertarian faction of his followers will probably vote for Gary Johnson. None of my Libertarian contacts are talking of staying home or much less voting for Obama. I just can’t imagine a Libertarian voting for Obama. Now there are some Paul followers that had been Democrats and they might stay home if Paul doesn’t stand four square behind the nominee.
Well, Maggie, that’s my opinion for what it is worth. Thanks again for your comment.
Jim, so glad that you’re back! And I agree with you, of course, since I support Ron Paul. I think the Maine caucus this Saturday is Paul’s best chance to win a state. If this doesn’t happen…well, I’ll be glad to see him continue to educate people all the way to the convention.
I believe only Ron Paul can defeat Obama. If you want to defeat an incumbent, history shows you don’t do it with a “safe” moderate.
Republicans don’t really stand for anything, and that is the problem. The party that once talked about getting rid of the department of education are now a bunch of cowards too afraid to do so. How can they convince us libertarians to vote for them in the general if we don’t see any real difference between both parties? Neither Romney nor Obama will do anything to change the monetary policy or the foreign policy. The two parties only disagree on minor issues at this point.
Remember the 2008 race? Both candidates supported TARP so we were robbed of a discussion on that topic. That was a great example of how both parties are the same when it comes to the stuff that matters.
I know how the Republicans can get the libertarians on their side. Have Ron’s son, Rand as a running mate. BUT, I don’t like that idea because I don’t see why Rand would want to be VP under a president that he disagrees with on actually balancing the budget and on monetary policy. I think it would actually hurt Rand’s chances when he does run for president. I would rather see him run in 2016 as a Senator, because I don’t see anyone besides Ron Paul defeating Obama.
What worries me, Ivan, is I am not convinced we can wait until 2016.
I must say, I like Rand Paul even more than I like his father.
Yeah, that scares me also.