If it is to be Mitt Romney who outlasts the GOP circus acts in Iowa, NH, SC and FL, then with the victory comes the long-anticipated match-up with POTUS Obama. An honest concern is that with these two leading the tickets, how can you sustain the dinner party conversation on the election? You may not be able to. You may change the subject to dessert, or to baseball season, or to the unusual weather (if it can be found anywhere). The election could quickly become the topic no one will speak. The table-killer. This will alarm the cables, which depend upon alienation and desperation. The two men are harmless as personalities. The two men can present themselves as leaders for the Brave New Normal, but no one over 40 is going to believe it for long. Suppose they held an election and no one listened? I will have to dig to find something credible to say about either man, because at this time they have labored for decades in order to appear pleasant blanks. They will be what we say they are for as long as it takes them to get to the next poll. The plain-dressed pursuit of campaign money to feed their needy ops is their business. Reading Republic, Lost by the law professor Lawrence Lessig, who despairs that our representative democracy is in tatters because of the dominating demands of the rich and potent lobbies that lease Congress for a pittance and direct the state willy-nilly. Less a conspiracy than a broken toy for the super-rich and the well-organized (Big Law, Big Labor, Big Air, Big Pharma, etc). Lessig proposes dramatic turns to banish cash, such as direct financing of amateur primary candidates by voucher system; such as campaigning for 34 states to call for a Constitutional Convention. Lessig sounds defeated. Lessig, who identifies with Progressive Democrats of the academic flavor, writes that POTUS Obama pulled a textbook bait-and-switch with his "change" campaign that delivered him to Washington as just another one of the gang. Is Romney a "change" candidate? Nah. Romney doesn't even pretend to be other than routinely competent at managing ineffective or antique systems for profit. It is a semi-mystery why he wants to be president. To accomplish what? To win what? It will be a challenge to speak of these men as more than stand-ins. Am trusting the weather will improve for the young just leaving school. It is their planet more than Romney's or Obama's. Both major parties have lost their point of view. It is all either of them can do to villainize the other. What daring dullards.
Following George H.W Bush the country sought a younger more energetic candidate. Thus Clinton. Following Clinton they sought someone they perceived as decent and sincere. Thus Bush 43. and Following Bush 43 they felt the need for someone articulate. Thus POTUS Obama. I expect that this cycle they seek someone they perceive as competent. If so It is Romney's to lose.
As a Massachusetts resident I have not been enthralled with Mitt and have been searching for someone else, but here's the main point, who can WIN. I've seen myself voting for Bachman, Perry Cain, and even Newt but no longer. I just want to win. Here in Massachusetts I'm use to my vote not counting. As a conservative who often faces only democrats as a choice on my general election ballot I often vote for the candidate who going to do the less damage. The direction the GOP primary's are headed that really only leaves one clear choice. Not the ideal choice in my conservative/libertarian mindset but that's life.
The coming election may be a yawner but that usually leaves the young progressive college students in the dorm or taverns rather than the polling booth. Lastly, to illustrate, when Kerry ran against Bush 43 the pundits had John Forbes Kerry winning. When I woke up I checked the weather for Ohio. It was raining. I was happy because I knew Kerry's support was like a cookie sheet. There was no depth to it. As soon as it was "hard" for his young poor not used to voting constituents, I knew Bush had a chance.("You mean I have to go out in the cold rain to vote?" ) Obama is that way today. He rode the wave of many new young first time voters to the white-house. as it stands today I do not see many of these youth duplicating their efforts, especially if it's "hard" because of cold, rain, or a re-run of Survivor on TV.
A win is a win. Let's win this one.
JB,
Can Mitt Romney win a three or four way race? Will Obama dump Biden and pick up Byhe or Clinton? Will Romney pick up a "conservative" VP or go with someone with unimpeachable character like General Petraeus?
JD
Re Joe Doakes comment. In a three way race the victory goes to the incumbent, unless the 3rd party candidate is a moon-bat. If Obama changes candidates he changes his own narrative. The media will be asking questions as to what is wrong with the status quo? Why are you changing? What of Joe Biden? They can barely keep him bridled now. He would need to be made ambassador to Monte Carlo or the Cayman Islands to silence him. Yes ultimately Romney needs a conservative VP with unimpeachable character but it must also be someone who can deliver a swing state. If John Edwards delivers North Carolina for Kerry, the rain in Ohio wouldn't have mattered.
"Lessig proposes dramatic turns to banish cash, such as direct financing of amateur primary candidates by voucher system, such as campaigning for 34 states to call for a Constitutional Convention."
Be deeply, deeply suspicious of any creature, regardless of garb, preaching the way to cure American politics, assuming a cure is wanted or would make things better for the majority, is to come up with more ways to silence positions. Talk about exhausted Liberal canards! Thanks to industrious stupid Progressives like the founders of Common Cause, sufficient damage has been done to public dialog.
"Lessig sounds defeated."
Not defeated enough, if he still breathes.
"Lessig, who identifies with Progressive Democrats of the academic flavor,"
No! Really? How did I guess?
"Romney doesn't even pretend to be be other than routinely competent at managing ineffective or antique systems for profit."
Gee, at this stage, I'd be slobberingly grateful for such a one. It would be nice too to have an administration that wasn't carrying on the most vindictively destructive campaign against the South since Reconstruction.
Romney-Christie
Romney needs to win the Reagan Democrats in the Midwest, Christie appeals to the blue collar Catholic vote.
What does Hillary bring to the ticket?
"What does Hillary bring to the ticket?"
She has the only balls in the administration, but now Obama doesn't need them now since he's got UBL's head on a pike above the city gates. So she really doesn't bring anything to the ticket except Bill and his exceptional skills. But let the criminal conspiracy masquerading as a political party think she does. Obviously Reich, a minor player in the scheme of things, thinks she does. As has often been noted, they have no new thing, no new blood, no deep bench, no new ideas, no nothing but reprises of FDR/TR.
From WSJ Political Diary
Quote of the Day
My political prediction for 2012 (based on absolutely no inside information): Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden swap places. Biden becomes Secretary of State -- a position he's apparently coveted for years. And Hillary Clinton, Vice President.
So the Democratic ticket for 2012 is Obama-Clinton.
Why do I say this? Because Obama needs to stir the passions and enthusiasms of a Democratic base that's been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans. Hillary Clinton on the ticket can do that.
Moreover, the economy won't be in superb shape in the months leading up to Election Day. Indeed, if the European debt crisis grows worse and if China's economy continues to slow, there's a better than even chance we'll be back in a recession. Clinton would help deflect attention from the bad economy and put it on foreign policy, where she and Obama have shined.
The deal would also make Clinton the obvious Democratic presidential candidate in 2016 -- offering the Democrats a shot at twelve (or more) years in the White House, something the Republicans had with Ronald Reagan and the first George Bush but which the Democrats haven't had since FDR. Twelve years gives the party in power a chance to reshape the Supreme Court as well as put an indelible stamp on America. -- Robert Reich blogging at huffingtonpost.com on Dec. 28.
Q: WILL OBAMA DRAG US INTO A WAR WITH IRAN TO GET HIMSELF RE-ELECTED?
A: Unknown
"... foreign policy [is] where [Clinton] and Obama have shined."
Pure spin from Robert Reich.
Obama has no foreign policy. His big claim to fame is killing UBL. But this is something that any President would've done.
What Obama's team is good at is strategy. Especially election strategy. Pulling out of Iraq as precipitously as he did was not in America's best interest. However, it did give Obama some street cred for fulfilling his election promise and being anti-war. It also provides cover if he chooses to go to war with Iran -- knowing full well that during a war the incumbent almost always gets re-elected.
"Pure spin from Robert Reich."
I thought of it as comic relief.
"What Obama's team is good at is strategy."
They do elections. They don't do government.
"Pulling out of Iraq as precipitously as he did was not in America's best interest."
It's fortunate that they don't really care. Just like GHWBush didn't care what happened to the Kurds or the Marsh Arabs when they stupidly follwed that "good" man's encouragement to revolt. That wasn't good for America either. We all deserve better than what we've had in the last 25 years of government. If we can't get perfection, or even okay, we at least deserve competence. I don't know that we've had any of that in a half century, except for '95-'98.
"...the most vindictively destructive campaign against the South since Reconstruction."
Corlyss! It's a shame to have to admit that. Isn't it? I sometimes wonder if "they" have a plan to somehow suspend the elcection, or at least postpone. If they do, I am certain I know which demographic will be targeted as the reason. Twenty years ago even wondering about such a "what if" would have been dismissed as paranoid and at best silly. (not so much anymore)
Paul,
We ain't seen nothin' yet. The only reason Holder is still AG is because he will be the field general prosecuting an unprecedented number of voter intimidation cases from Virginia to Florida to Texas and all points in between. His minions in Justice are already deployed against voter ID laws in swing states (non-swing states can have all the voter ID requirements they want).
JB, I don't remember Captain Kirk ever taking this much shore leave at once.
Don't you have a Holideck at WABC studios?
Lou: Enterprise in drydock for repairs. Whole new management at Star Fleet. Admirals sent packing. New guys from frontier of Federation. Certain Romulan whispers. Also, there is no news until the IA contest is done, and will be back on air 3 January. The markets finished flat to heavy negative (Europe) for year. North Korea is rogue. Egypt is failed. Yemen is failed. Iran is rogue. Nothing new, everyone on hold.
Am watching for who makes the first move of January. The White House is feckless, bootless and predictable. POTUS is on auto-pilot.
Apropos of nothing in particular save the Star Trek mentions, William Campbell passed this year. He appeared in at least one classic episode, The Trouble with Tribbles, and one lesser known, The Squire of Gothos. The latter had some choice Spock lines about abuse of power. Campbell's other claim to fame is as the former husband of Judith Exner, the bimbo and bagwoman who was sleeping with JFK and Sam Giancana during the same period.
JB,
That's one button I'm sure that is not present in the White House . . . auto-pilot . . . if it was I'm certain President Obama would have pushed it by now.
JD
A little off topic - but are any of you Stratfor customers? I just get the free newsletter, and already this afternoon my broadband provider account was the subject of hacking attempts from IP addresses originating in foreign countries, according to the security department of my broadband provider. It looks like Stratfor is only providing support for their paying customers at this point.
I guess I'm going to have sign up with LifeLock or one of their competitors right away. What a black eye for Stratfor, especially with them being in the "strategerie" and intelligence business.
"A little off topic - but are any of you Stratfor customers?"
I was a paying subscriber until this Sept. I'm damn mad about the hacking and t'ed off at Stratfor too for it's part in the incident. I'm going to have to buy more pins for my Assange doll.
"any of you Stratfor customers?"
I get the free newsletter, as well. Also got a few e-mails from George Friedman about the incident.
Haven't noticed anything unusual -- yet.
Romulans. I like not that. Not in the White House. Nor messing with my Renaissance Man galaxy. Out, damned Romulans. Reptilians too. Banish-ed.