So I just finished watching the CNBC “Your Money Your Vote” GOP Debate and thought I’d share my thoughts on the night and the state of the primary situation as we stand a little less than one year away from Election Day.
Let’s start with Mitt Romney. I’ll be honest, as an Independent, Romney has the best chance of winning my vote over Obama than any of the other candidates. He’s got 25 years as a businessman before he became governor, so he’s got economic experience (the most important qualification for this election) and he polls the best against Obama in national polls. And Republicans have a tendency to elect candidates who were the runners-up in the last primary. McCain was runner up to George W. Bush before he clinched the nomination in 2008 when he edged out Mitt Romney. So now establishment rules predict a Romney nomination. Except that Republicans don’t seem to be warming up to the former Massachusetts governor and while he’s had a consistent, well-oiled campaign machine, Romney still cannot seem to significantly outdistance his opponents.
This is mostly due to the sense of distrust that core Bible-Belt Republicans have of Northeastern conservatives, which is fueled by their characterization of Romney as a flip-flopper. But let’s face it; Northeastern Republicans are going to face adversity in their legislatures which are going to require compromise and a certain amount of fluidity. Yes, drastic changes in policy are a problem, they raise questions of core values and consistency, but I have yet to see Romney come off as a two-faced liar in any regard. He’s a politician and has had to make changes to policies to get them to pass; at least he’s getting something done. Besides, as we learn new things and find ourselves in new situations, the smart thing to do is adapt accordingly.
Finally people seem to be realizing the difference between compromise and flip-flopping, both in recent political commentary and also in this debate. But don’t ask Rick Perry to spell anything out for you. He pretty much ignored and refused to answer a question regarding compromise shown in decisions made by Reagan, Bush, and Romney that could be characterized as flip-flopping. But that wasn’t his biggest problem of the night, as he spent a full minute awkwardly trying to remember which government departments he would cut. He didn’t remember and simply said, “Oops.”
That “Oops” is the sound of Perry’s campaign imploding, serving as the perfect example of the governor of Texas failing to be adequately prepared for his candidacy. Which is fine by me. I don’t personally like the guy. He got into the campaign for all the wrong reasons, jumping in after lots of people told him how much they liked him, even though he hadn’t really considered it up until that point and didn’t have any ideas to run a platform on (unless you count not being Romney as a key point, which many unfortunately do). It took him weeks to come up with a plan, showing that he figured running for the Presidency would be fun and he could come up with ideas and policies along the way. Besides, he truly comes off, especially in the debate before this one, as really just being a big douche who’s not used to facing opposition. Rick Perry: Texas’s stubborn baby, unable to articulate what he wants and mad that he can’t have it right now. But like I said, I’m a little biased.
And as Rick Perry’s star falls, Newt Gingrich’s is on the rise. Apparently the candidate next in line to be the anti-Romney candidate after Michele Bachman, Perry, Ron Paul, and most recently Herman Cain all lost their shot to dethrone Romney’s consistency, Newt Gingrich is probably the only other candidate that I would consider voting for. He has an impressive record that many of the other candidates lack and his straight-forward, professorial speaking style is both frank and substantive. Where his support can come from, I’m not sure. He seems to have taken a little from everybody during his recent climb in the polls. But if Newt wants to be the nominee, he unfortunately has to bet on his friend, Herman Cain, losing most of that Tea Party vote that seems to pick a different candidate every month. But not only is Newt smart, but he’s quick-on-his-feet witty too. For whatever reason the female moderator last night kept trying unsuccessfully to pick fights with Newt, and the more frustrated she got the more intelligent Newt proved to be.
Actually that particular moderator seemed rather snippy all night and her confrontational attitude simply made the instance when the audience and Mitt Romney completely shut the moderators down when they tried to go for the low blow on Herman Cain by bringing up the sexual harassment allegations al the more satisfying. Now, that isn’t to say that those allegations are not important. Whether or not Herman Cain harassed anyone is unclear. However, the National Restaurant Association did financially settle with a number of women, indicating that whether truthful or not, the NRA thought the women had a case against Cain and that he evidently put himself in a situation where there was potential for his reputation to be tarnished. Whether or not he harassed anyone is important, but we also need to remember that even putting himself in a situation where the door could be opened for accusations is a problem too. Which is too bad, because I personally like Herman Cain and his style of campaigning. I don’t think he has the qualifications to run the country, but I like him and hope the allegations aren’t true. Regardless, they’ve already hurt him in potential national election polls, which will likely begin to translate into a primary polling downslide soon as well.
The other candidates don’t really require as much time, because, at this point, the rest are unlikely to win. Michele Bachmann didn’t take advantage of the opportunity to frame Romney as not being conservative when discussing flat tax issues, but her popularity was gone long ago. Besides, she’s too inexperienced and too far to the right to do well in a national election anyways. Jon Huntsman is a nice guy, but I don’t see a competitive edge, he’s out of money, has staked his entire campaign on 1 state (New Hampshire), and is too moderate to win core conservative votes. Rick Santorum’s got a respectable amount of experience, is fiercely devoted to his values, and while he has little support, I could see him becoming the next anti-Romney if the public tires of Newt Gingrich. Ron Paul is a genius and fantastic as always, but won’t win. And then there’s the candidate who wasn’t even at the debate, Gary Johnson. Who? Exactly.
Pretty much, Romney remains consistent. Other candidates have come and go. Romney will probably win, as voters run out of options. Although I like super-smart Newt Gingrich too. And Perry’s an idiot. So there you have it; my take on our current political climate. I’ll let you know if anything changes.
Finally people seem to be realizing the difference between compromise and flip-flopping, both in recent political commentary and also in this debate. But don’t ask Rick Perry to spell anything out for you. He pretty much ignored and refused to answer a question regarding compromise shown in decisions made by Reagan, Bush, and Romney that could be characterized as flip-flopping. But that wasn’t his biggest problem of the night, as he spent a full minute awkwardly trying to remember which government departments he would cut. He didn’t remember and simply said, “Oops.”
That “Oops” is the sound of Perry’s campaign imploding, serving as the perfect example of the governor of Texas failing to be adequately prepared for his candidacy. Which is fine by me. I don’t personally like the guy. He got into the campaign for all the wrong reasons, jumping in after lots of people told him how much they liked him, even though he hadn’t really considered it up until that point and didn’t have any ideas to run a platform on (unless you count not being Romney as a key point, which many unfortunately do). It took him weeks to come up with a plan, showing that he figured running for the Presidency would be fun and he could come up with ideas and policies along the way. Besides, he truly comes off, especially in the debate before this one, as really just being a big douche who’s not used to facing opposition. Rick Perry: Texas’s stubborn baby, unable to articulate what he wants and mad that he can’t have it right now. But like I said, I’m a little biased.
And as Rick Perry’s star falls, Newt Gingrich’s is on the rise. Apparently the candidate next in line to be the anti-Romney candidate after Michele Bachman, Perry, Ron Paul, and most recently Herman Cain all lost their shot to dethrone Romney’s consistency, Newt Gingrich is probably the only other candidate that I would consider voting for. He has an impressive record that many of the other candidates lack and his straight-forward, professorial speaking style is both frank and substantive. Where his support can come from, I’m not sure. He seems to have taken a little from everybody during his recent climb in the polls. But if Newt wants to be the nominee, he unfortunately has to bet on his friend, Herman Cain, losing most of that Tea Party vote that seems to pick a different candidate every month. But not only is Newt smart, but he’s quick-on-his-feet witty too. For whatever reason the female moderator last night kept trying unsuccessfully to pick fights with Newt, and the more frustrated she got the more intelligent Newt proved to be.
Actually that particular moderator seemed rather snippy all night and her confrontational attitude simply made the instance when the audience and Mitt Romney completely shut the moderators down when they tried to go for the low blow on Herman Cain by bringing up the sexual harassment allegations al the more satisfying. Now, that isn’t to say that those allegations are not important. Whether or not Herman Cain harassed anyone is unclear. However, the National Restaurant Association did financially settle with a number of women, indicating that whether truthful or not, the NRA thought the women had a case against Cain and that he evidently put himself in a situation where there was potential for his reputation to be tarnished. Whether or not he harassed anyone is important, but we also need to remember that even putting himself in a situation where the door could be opened for accusations is a problem too. Which is too bad, because I personally like Herman Cain and his style of campaigning. I don’t think he has the qualifications to run the country, but I like him and hope the allegations aren’t true. Regardless, they’ve already hurt him in potential national election polls, which will likely begin to translate into a primary polling downslide soon as well.
The other candidates don’t really require as much time, because, at this point, the rest are unlikely to win. Michele Bachmann didn’t take advantage of the opportunity to frame Romney as not being conservative when discussing flat tax issues, but her popularity was gone long ago. Besides, she’s too inexperienced and too far to the right to do well in a national election anyways. Jon Huntsman is a nice guy, but I don’t see a competitive edge, he’s out of money, has staked his entire campaign on 1 state (New Hampshire), and is too moderate to win core conservative votes. Rick Santorum’s got a respectable amount of experience, is fiercely devoted to his values, and while he has little support, I could see him becoming the next anti-Romney if the public tires of Newt Gingrich. Ron Paul is a genius and fantastic as always, but won’t win. And then there’s the candidate who wasn’t even at the debate, Gary Johnson. Who? Exactly.
Pretty much, Romney remains consistent. Other candidates have come and go. Romney will probably win, as voters run out of options. Although I like super-smart Newt Gingrich too. And Perry’s an idiot. So there you have it; my take on our current political climate. I’ll let you know if anything changes.
No comments:
Post a Comment