Readers of this blog are familiar with my love for Johnny Mercer's music. He is the greatest lyricist America has ever produced. My latest 8tracks mix is dedicated to him:
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
Is This The End Of Newt?
Last night's debate in Jacksonville may mark the end of Newt Gingrich's chance at the GOP nomination. Mitt Romney beat him, hands down. Romney himself took a very large (and well-deserved) shot from Rick Santorum on RomneyCare but other than that Romney was impressive - as confident and self-assured as I've ever seen him - and Newt wasn't. Newt was already fading in the pre-debate Florida polls and I expect him to fade further after such a lousy debate performance. I would not be surprised if Romney defeated Newt in Florida by at least as much as Newt defeated Romney is South Carolina. Newt has already come back from the dead twice. I don't expect it will happen a third time. He is genuinely angry at Romney's negative, and mostly true, advertising and it's not bringing out the best in him. Perhaps it's just me but I don't think he wears well. What seemed like riteous indignation in earlier debates now seems like arrogance and prickliness. His schtick is pretty well known now and the more we get to know him the less impressive he seems. And that makes sense - the people who know him best all seem to despise him.
So is Romney the nominee? Probably, though that is still not certain. Santorum was great last night, his best debate by far. He has far more substance than Romney or Gingrich and, perhaps more importantly, he delivered his message without the whininess we've come to expect from him. When he got angry is wasn't petulant. He, rather than Newt, was the righteously angry one, especially when he nailed Romney on RomneyCare. He seemed confident and (almost) presidential. While I despise his brand of "compassionate conservatism" and don't think he'll do what is necessary regarding the debt (massive and comprehensive entitlement reform, ) I do think he'd be at least as fiscally responsible as Romney or Gingrich.
Can any of these guys beat Obama? That is far from clear. I have never bought into the notion that we need to select Romney as the nominee because he's the most "electable." Where is the evidence for that? The guy has won one election in his life. He won a couple of primaries in 2008 and one of three in 2012 against a very weak field. So the electability case does not lie with Mitt's proven ability to win elections. Apparently it's that Romney is non-threatening to the independents who will decide this race. Perhaps, but it is far from certain he can swing enough of them to his side against Obama in the general. He has the image of a hollow man with no fixed beliefs other than that he should be the president (I stole that description from this great Mark Steyn post over at The Corner.) As Santorum stated so well last night, if Romney is the nominee the issue of ObamaCare is largely moot in the general. Romney also had a great opportunity to make a case for capitalism when his career at Bain Capital became an issue but he has largely blown that. If he is unable to make the capitalist case in the general and is unable to change the "hollow man" impression, how will he win against a well-funded incumbent? So far Romney has not shown me that he can win but his performance last night - minus the Santorum delivered RomneyCare episode - gives one hope.
Newt would get slaughtered by Obama in the general. The idea that Newt should be the nominee because he could win a debate against Obama is nonsense - the debates in the general matter little (except perhaps Reagan's first debate against Carter when he delivered the "there you go again" line.) Last night showed how easy it would be to put Newt on the defensive during a debate. And with expectations so high that Newt would thump Obama in debate, all Obama would have to do is fairly well to defeat those expectations. I expect a Newt/Obama debate would help Obama and possibly do Newt great harm.
Another point on Newt as the nominee. My buddy Mike and I have paid close attention to Obama's approval ratings for a year now, figuring anyone with an approval of only 43-44% cannot win the general election. We failed to take into account the approval rating of his opponent. Newt's approval ratings are much lower than Obama's, I think around 30%. No candidate can win with approvals that low. So let's forget about Newt Gingrich as our nominee right now.
Santorum? I don't think so. Last night was the first time he has seemed even semi-presidential. Usually he seems a bit sheepish and schoolboy-ish, the kind of schoolboy who runs to the teacher to tell on you. That may be unfair but that's always been my impression of him. Even if he can gain confidence and start appealing to people as a man of substance, he'd have trouble in the general. While he speaks thoughtfully and forcefully on the issue of faith, which appeals to many on the right including myself, the Obama folks and the mainstream media (that's a redundancy, I know) would paint him in the general as a Christian wacko who hates gays, will take away your contraception and your right to abortion, and will force prayer in schools. That he is only arguing that faith is a cornerstone of our laws and traditions and should not be barred from the public square will not matter.
So here we are, at a moment of national crisis, stuck with three candidates who all seem like losers. Re-reading what I wrote above, I guess Romney is the best choice. So I guess I'll bite down hard on the bullet and support him. Why? Defeating Obama in November is imperative. But so is keeping the House and possibly gaining the Senate. Romney seems like the guy least likely to damage to the bottom of the ticket. If Obama does win, we need a Congress that will keep him in line. And if Romney somehow pulls it out, he'll have something to work with.
So is Romney the nominee? Probably, though that is still not certain. Santorum was great last night, his best debate by far. He has far more substance than Romney or Gingrich and, perhaps more importantly, he delivered his message without the whininess we've come to expect from him. When he got angry is wasn't petulant. He, rather than Newt, was the righteously angry one, especially when he nailed Romney on RomneyCare. He seemed confident and (almost) presidential. While I despise his brand of "compassionate conservatism" and don't think he'll do what is necessary regarding the debt (massive and comprehensive entitlement reform, ) I do think he'd be at least as fiscally responsible as Romney or Gingrich.
Can any of these guys beat Obama? That is far from clear. I have never bought into the notion that we need to select Romney as the nominee because he's the most "electable." Where is the evidence for that? The guy has won one election in his life. He won a couple of primaries in 2008 and one of three in 2012 against a very weak field. So the electability case does not lie with Mitt's proven ability to win elections. Apparently it's that Romney is non-threatening to the independents who will decide this race. Perhaps, but it is far from certain he can swing enough of them to his side against Obama in the general. He has the image of a hollow man with no fixed beliefs other than that he should be the president (I stole that description from this great Mark Steyn post over at The Corner.) As Santorum stated so well last night, if Romney is the nominee the issue of ObamaCare is largely moot in the general. Romney also had a great opportunity to make a case for capitalism when his career at Bain Capital became an issue but he has largely blown that. If he is unable to make the capitalist case in the general and is unable to change the "hollow man" impression, how will he win against a well-funded incumbent? So far Romney has not shown me that he can win but his performance last night - minus the Santorum delivered RomneyCare episode - gives one hope.
Newt would get slaughtered by Obama in the general. The idea that Newt should be the nominee because he could win a debate against Obama is nonsense - the debates in the general matter little (except perhaps Reagan's first debate against Carter when he delivered the "there you go again" line.) Last night showed how easy it would be to put Newt on the defensive during a debate. And with expectations so high that Newt would thump Obama in debate, all Obama would have to do is fairly well to defeat those expectations. I expect a Newt/Obama debate would help Obama and possibly do Newt great harm.
Another point on Newt as the nominee. My buddy Mike and I have paid close attention to Obama's approval ratings for a year now, figuring anyone with an approval of only 43-44% cannot win the general election. We failed to take into account the approval rating of his opponent. Newt's approval ratings are much lower than Obama's, I think around 30%. No candidate can win with approvals that low. So let's forget about Newt Gingrich as our nominee right now.
Santorum? I don't think so. Last night was the first time he has seemed even semi-presidential. Usually he seems a bit sheepish and schoolboy-ish, the kind of schoolboy who runs to the teacher to tell on you. That may be unfair but that's always been my impression of him. Even if he can gain confidence and start appealing to people as a man of substance, he'd have trouble in the general. While he speaks thoughtfully and forcefully on the issue of faith, which appeals to many on the right including myself, the Obama folks and the mainstream media (that's a redundancy, I know) would paint him in the general as a Christian wacko who hates gays, will take away your contraception and your right to abortion, and will force prayer in schools. That he is only arguing that faith is a cornerstone of our laws and traditions and should not be barred from the public square will not matter.
So here we are, at a moment of national crisis, stuck with three candidates who all seem like losers. Re-reading what I wrote above, I guess Romney is the best choice. So I guess I'll bite down hard on the bullet and support him. Why? Defeating Obama in November is imperative. But so is keeping the House and possibly gaining the Senate. Romney seems like the guy least likely to damage to the bottom of the ticket. If Obama does win, we need a Congress that will keep him in line. And if Romney somehow pulls it out, he'll have something to work with.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Billy and Joanne
I think that was her name. Anyhow, attempting to post an FLV file on my blog with this new plugin:
[hana-flv-player
video="http://whatsnew-dc.com/wp-content/plugins/hana-flv-player/BillyandJoanne.flv"
width="400"
height="320"
description="Some celebration with Billy and his first wife"
clickurl="http://whatsnew-dc.com/"
clicktarget="_blank"
player="4"
autoplay="false"
loop="false"
autorewind="true"
splashimage="" /]
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Friday, September 23, 2011
The Days Of Wine And Roses...And You
Feeling wistful about the end of summer? My latest 8tracks mix:
Excerpt
I'm not alone:
"But no front-runner in a presidential field has ever, we imagine, had as weak a showing as Rick Perry. It was close to a disqualifying two hours for him. And Mitt Romney remains, when all is said and done, a technocratic management consultant whose one term as governor produced Romneycare. He could rise to the occasion as president. Or not."
- Bill Kristol, in today's Weekly Standard editorial
"But no front-runner in a presidential field has ever, we imagine, had as weak a showing as Rick Perry. It was close to a disqualifying two hours for him. And Mitt Romney remains, when all is said and done, a technocratic management consultant whose one term as governor produced Romneycare. He could rise to the occasion as president. Or not."
- Bill Kristol, in today's Weekly Standard editorial
Mitt, not Rick
Based on his dreadful debate performances, Rick Perry seems to have given little thought to the important public policy issues of the day. When Perry first announced his candidacy for the GOP nomination I was glad to have him in the field, and even a tentative supporter. I heard he was a "real" conservative, not a "compassionate" conservative (a term and a governing philosophy I've always abhored) like Bush. He was also confident, appealling, and good-looking, i.e. a lot of the thing one needs to be elected these days. Unfortunately, a lot of what we've learned about him since, combined with his debate performances, have given me pause. Right now (it is my belief) the only way for Obama to be re-elected next year is for the Republicans to blow it, and Rick Perry could blow it. Rather than get stronger as the campaign has progressed, he has gotten weaker, and seems smaller. He is unsure of himself and unable to defend his positions when challenged, even when his positions are easily defensible. Obama was not-ready-for-prime-time when he ran four years ago but the mainstream media camouflaged that fact. They are unlikely to give Perry the same protection. Quite the opposite - the media will pounce on his every hesitation or misstep. Furthermore, I now have doubts about his conservative bona fides. He seems much more a crony-capitalist than a free marketer. Is crony-capitalism what we want at a time when crony-capitalism is one of the big reasons we are failing as a nation? Washington D.C. needs to be purged, and the way the federal government operates needs to be dismantled, not reinforced. I doubt Perry has the ability, let alone the desire, to do this. His inability to articulate conservative positions tell me he has spent little time thinking about these things. It seems more likely to me that Perry has done what it takes to seem conservative because that is what is needed to get elected and to succesfully govern in Texas.
So here is a sentence I thought would never cross my lips (or type in a blog post): I am pulling for Mitt Romney to win the GOP presidential nomination. Now, for a lifelong conservative like myself, one who is hoping for a revolutionary reversal back to the principles of limited government, Mitt Romney is totally inadequate. He is a wishy-washy, flip-flopping, often liberal-leaning conservative-manqué, someone whose only true conviction is that he should be president. But since the only other person currently in the field with a ghost of a chance to win is Rick Perry, I'm throwing in with Mitt. Mitt is smoothness personified, he can think on his feet, rarely makes a gaffe, and is palatable to the independents that are currently so dissatisfied with Obama, much more palatable than Perry. Now, Mitt Romney is never going to lead a revolution (though one could possibly be forced on him from below.) But that is not the primary issue at hand. The main issue at hand, in my opinion, is to defeat the incompetent putz who curretly sits in the Oval Office. In every head-to-head poll against Obama, Romney outperforms Perry. Since Mitt Romney is more likely than Perry to defeat Obama, Romney is my man, at least for the time being.
God help us all.
So here is a sentence I thought would never cross my lips (or type in a blog post): I am pulling for Mitt Romney to win the GOP presidential nomination. Now, for a lifelong conservative like myself, one who is hoping for a revolutionary reversal back to the principles of limited government, Mitt Romney is totally inadequate. He is a wishy-washy, flip-flopping, often liberal-leaning conservative-manqué, someone whose only true conviction is that he should be president. But since the only other person currently in the field with a ghost of a chance to win is Rick Perry, I'm throwing in with Mitt. Mitt is smoothness personified, he can think on his feet, rarely makes a gaffe, and is palatable to the independents that are currently so dissatisfied with Obama, much more palatable than Perry. Now, Mitt Romney is never going to lead a revolution (though one could possibly be forced on him from below.) But that is not the primary issue at hand. The main issue at hand, in my opinion, is to defeat the incompetent putz who curretly sits in the Oval Office. In every head-to-head poll against Obama, Romney outperforms Perry. Since Mitt Romney is more likely than Perry to defeat Obama, Romney is my man, at least for the time being.
God help us all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)