Tag: 2008

Categories
National politics

Build Your Own Cage

Thinking about the idea of a split in the GOP makes me wonder about how we got where we are. Why is the leading candidate for the party unpalatable for a large segment of the party base? I am reminded that “parties are simply alliances of groups that can put aside their differences sufficiently to focus on a few areas where they mostly agree.” Considering that it is not so surprising that the fiscal conservatives are ready to back Giuliani after years of being out-shouted within the party by the social conservatives.

The real dynamic of the nomination process is that the Democrats are united in their desire for a large government that will protect us from negative consequences with social programs to help us go to school, pay for necessities when we lose jobs, ensure access to health care services, legislating social tolerance, and promote international good will by throwing money at the problems plaguing poor nations. Social conservatives have been content – even excited – with a large government that will protect us from change by spending money to wage war against radical Islam around the world, building fences at our borders, listening in to our private conversations in case someone expresses an idea they deem dangerous, and regulating our public conversation against indecency. There is a third group who wants less government and more personal responsibility – including the possibility of suffering the consequences of poor social or financial choices. This group is so tired of being pushed to the side that they are willing to settle on any candidate who will at least promise to keep the growth to a minimum.

The ability of this third group to make Giuliani the frontrunner is what has lead to the warning by social conservatives that they might not support Giuliani. After so long in power they seem to forget that this was a coalition. They don’t seem to care that Big Government is the Enemy of Freedom. They want to coerce the nation in to following their vision of what this nation should be and forget that their coercive tactics would lead them into this very trap.

Categories
National politics

Could Giuliani Split the GOP?

I found the idea interesting that Christian leaders threaten to abandon Republicans if Giuliani is the nominee. John Hinderaker at Power Line doesn’t think so. I can’t claim to have more information than John, but I would not be so quick to dismiss the possibility. I know that I can’t vote for Giuliani though I can only speak for myself. (Whether I am at all representative of GOP voters at large is highly debatable.) I am not always a fan of James Dobson and for me the Giuliani issue is not a simple matter of his position on abortion. The fact is that I could name three candidates among the Democratic hopefuls this year who I could vote for over Giuliani.

When I consider candidates I essentially rate them on a personal scale – I don’t try to press my criteria on other people, but I imagine that some other people do a similar thing in deciding who to support. This places candidates on a scale ranking who I would be more likely to support out of any given set of candidates. On that scale there is a line which I have decided to call the Write-In Line. Candidates falling below that line can’t get my vote no matter who they are running against. (I considered calling it the Orrin Hatch Line since I think I could vote for Orrin if he were running against Giuliani – but he’s pretty well lost my vote otherwise.) If I am voting in a contest with no candidates above that line I write in a candidate who I could vote for. Who knows how many people there are like me who just could not vote for Giuliani.

If the goal of this group in raising the option of a GOP split is to keep Giuliani from getting the nomination then their best chance would be to go one step further and choose a candidate now that they could support – I have a short list if they’re interested. I would say that they have to back someone no later than the day after the Iowa caucuses if they want to have any impact in the nomination. If they are really like me and could not vote for Giuliani then I would say that the possibility of a split is real and a Giuliani nomination could change the face of American politics.

Categories
National politics

Political Conundrum

I have been evaluating my position with regards to the presidential candidates – specifically those in the Republican party. Right now there is a front runner that I don’t think I could be compelled to vote for in the general election no matter who his opponent was. I could give up all hope except that I really do think that Mitt would make a good president and despite any of the early questions about whether he could get the nomination he has shown that he has a legitimate shot to win the primaries.

My conundrum is that I really like Mike Huckabee as well. In fact I wish that he were in the top tier on par with Mitt (unless that would split the votes and pave the way for Giuliani to get the nomination). I think that Mike would make a much better president than McCain or Thompson. So my challenge is deciding how much to support Mike Huckabee without inadvertently helping Rudy Giuliani.

I have talked to Laura about this and also sought input from some other family and friends. Does anyone have any suggestions about how they might face this conflict of hopes?

Categories
National politics

No to Newt

Over at Oval Office there is a discussion about the implications of a potential presidential run for Newt Gingrich. I have to agree with the assessment that:

My take on the idea of Gingrich getting into the race at this point is that he would split the party’s votes further than it is already. . . But he wouldn’t draw from Giuliani’s support. It looks to me like those Republicans who have decided to support Hizzonner are sticking with him.

That is a scary scenario to me. The only serious candidate (meaning, not those like John Cox or Tom Tancredo) that I like less than Newt in the Republican field is Rudy. I was happy early this year when the conventional wisdom was that Newt would not choose to run if Fred Thompson ran. Now I am hoping that Newt will choose not to run and I think the best thing that could happen would be for Mitt Romney to win convincingly in Iowa so that most of the other candidates drop out. I really don’t think that Rudy can get support from more than half the Republican primary voters so if the field is narrowed to two early Rudy won’t get the nomination. (I pick Mitt partly because he has the financial backing to stand toe to toe with Rudy.)

Categories
politics

Real Debates

Mike Huckabee has offered to debate Fred Thompson, Lincoln-Douglas style. I think that Fred should accept the offer, but I know lots of reasons why he might chose not to. Mike has nothing to lose. Few people take his candidacy as seriously as they should and the media attention of such a debate would help Mike even if he didn’t trounce Fred. Fred would probably rather pretend that there are only 4 candidates in the race (Huckabee not being one of the other 3).

I think this kind of debate would be helpful to the voters because a Lincoln-Douglas debate tends to help shape the issue in the minds of the listeners. The kind of “debates” that we get among multiple candidates on network television only serve to allow the candidates a chance to try to convince the audience that they best represent the audience, rather than framing the issue to show that they best represent the truth, or the best way forward (depending on the type of issue being debated). Ideally there would be a series of debates on a variety of issues involving different sets of candidates. Each debate should feature only two candidates but each candidate would have debates with a number of other candidates. It would turn the primary campaign into something closer to a tournament allowing us to get to know the candidates (possibly better than we do now) and also helping the voters to get to know the issues instead of just the soundbites.

I hope that Mike gets to have his debate with Fred, or one of the other higher profile candidates, because if he does I am confident that he will prove himself to be every bit the equal of any other candidate. Considering the Fred apparently expressed a desire to have this kind of debate I think he should accept. If he does not I would call it political cowardice unless he manages to arrange for this kind of debate with some better known candidate in the field within the next couple of weeks.

Categories
politics

Could the Stars Align?

I’m liking the news I’m seeing right now. There is lots being said of Mike Huckabee’s second place finish in Ames. It’s too early to say if it will continue, but for now he is getting more of the press coverage that he deserves. I endorsed Mitt Romney before, and I don’t back off from that endorsement at all, but at the time I was not sure that Huckabee could become a serious contender for the nomination. If things continue like they are, with him getting more coverage than he was getting before, then I am sure that his message can be heard and appreciated enough to give him a legitimate shot at the nomination.

I would love to be able to choose between multiple candidates that I would be comfortable with. In the republican primaries I now have such a choice so long as Mitt and Mike are both still there. I guarantee that I am not going to vote for any of the other candidates (no matter who jumps in) if either of them is still running come February. (I’m sure that one of them will still be running by then if not both.) In the democratic primaries I could have had two if Tom Vilsack were still running – I still think he was the best candidate they have offered. Obama comes in second to Tom for me, and I am still not sure which Bill Richardson I believe in – the capable one who I think might be better than Obama, or the one who stumbles along with a long resume but too many gaffes to be taken seriously. I’m hoping for the capable one so that come general election time in 2008 I might conceivably have candidates from both major parties that I would be willing to vote for.

Unsaid in all this is that the two candidates I have listed who are considered major candidates by the media (Mitt and Obama) both have one flaw (the same one) that I am becoming less and less comfortable with. I’m saving that concern for a separate post so I can do it justice.

Categories
politics

Ames Results

The results of the straw poll in Ames were just what I would have wanted. Mitt Romney won, as predicted, but Mike Huckabee came in second as I had hoped. His second place finish was called a surprise, but I can’t imagine a better candidate in that spot. Unlike many better known candidates I would have no reservations with seeing Huckabee in the White House. The only thing I could have hoped for in Ames that didn’t happen would have been if Huckabee had garnered all the votes from those candidates who received less than 5% so that there was more distance between him and Sam Brownback in third place.

Categories
politics

Approaching Ames

I’m looking forward to the results of the Ames, Iowa straw poll this weekend. Because of the candidates who are skipping it I am not sure if it will have much effect on the top tier of the Republican field, but I am hoping that it will be beneficial to my favorite second tier candidtae among the Republicans, Mike Huckabee. In an interview for the Washington Post he took my preferred position on one issue where I disagree with Mitt Romney by endorsing John McCain’s stance regarding torture (or enhanced interrogation).

I would love to see Governor Huckabee in the top tier instead of someone like Rudy Giuliani who is well known but has not convinced me that he has anything more going for him than being in the right position at the right time to gain that fame. If the Ames straw poll plays out right for Huckabee, he might have a shot at breaking into the top tier and getting the exposure that he deserves in the media.

Categories
politics

2008 Endorsements

Endorsed

I believe that Mitt Romney is the best candidate for the country today. He has the experience of leading in both public and private capacities. His life is not littered with evidence of personal instability. He has the support of his family and the attention of the media. My confidence in his ability to be an effective leader for our nation is such that I have even donated to his campaign (a first for me). No other candidate or potential candidate appears to be as well suited for this job in our time.

Top Tier

As much as I like Mitt, I recognize that there are some other top-notch candidates out there. I would feel positive about the prospects of our nation if any of these top candidates were president.

Barack Obama has the charisma to energize people around him. He is intelligent and seems willing to go beyond appearances of what the political establishment endorses and choose to follow what he feels to be the best course on the issues. I believe that his time in the Senate has been enough to expose him to the realities of politics without being long enough to turn him into a jaded insider.

Mike Huckabee seems to be everything that Mitt Romney is except that he does not inspire so many people, nor garner the same media attention. He has the experience as governor to know how to lead and a life that demonstrates his convictions. In a different time he might even be a better candidate than Mitt, but today is not that time.

Tom Vilsack is another candidate who I would endorse as readily as Mitt, but he has dropped out of the race because he could not gather the media attention to keep his campaign afloat. He would make a fine addition to any ticket. In fact, he should be at the top of any ticket if he were still in the race himself.

Second Tier

Second tier candidates are those who I think could make decent but not noteworthy presidents. With some, such as John McCain and Bill Richardson, I had hoped to find top tier candidates. Their weaknesses in campaigning suggest that they are not so well prepared as those in the top tier. Others in this category include Joe Biden, Sam Brownback, Christopher Dodd, Rudy Giuliani, and Tommy Thompson. If he were still running I would have placed Jim Gilmore here as well. This is also where I would expect to place Fred Thompson if he formally entered the race.

Third Tier

Third tier candidates are those who are technically qualified so that I think they could be President, but who would likely be poor presidents. These include John Edwards, Daniel Imperato, Bob Jackson, and George Phillies. I would have included Hillary Clinton here, though as a front runner many would think me biased. Instead I felt that I could not endorse her because her history and the passion that many have against her essentially guarantee that she could not be effective. All the other candidates here would at least have hope of becoming effective.

Not Endorsed

If your favorite candidate is not listed above I would be surprised if they were also not listed among those I could not endorse. Those are Steve Adams, Donald Allen, Alan Augustson, John Bowles, John Cox, Mike Gravel, Jon Greenspon, Bob Hargis, Duncan Hunter, Mike Jingozian, David Koch, Steve Kubby, Dennis Kucinich, Charles Maxham, James Mccall, Ron Paul, Wayne Root, Joe Schriner, Christine Smith, Michael Smith, and Tom Tancredo. My reasons for not endorsing them can be found on their individual posts.

Categories
politics

Daniel Imperato

I have been conflicted on whether I should endorse Daniel Imperato. He has experience in business, which is generally a good thing for a president, and he appears to be a candidate with conviction. He seems to know what America wants, but he lacks the ability to inspire people to follow him. Considering my original criteria I must conclude that he is deserving of votes. Therefore, despite the reality that he would be lucky to even make it onto your ballot, I endorse Daniel Imperato.