Blog Archive

Monday, June 13, 2011

The Field of Unelectable Republicans

The stakes are high.  The Republicans have had almost three years to game plan against the Obama regime in 2012.  Surprisingly, President Obama has provided no shortage of ammo that can be used against him.  The day he was inaugurated he was facing an uphill battle with two wars, high unemployment, a crumbling financial system, and a modest budget deficit ($400 billion).  The deficit was used against the republicans in 2008, but now we would be relieved with a deficit that is quoted in billions and not trillions.  Bottom line, this election should be a slam dunk.  The republicans have the ammo, they have the support, but they don’t have the candidate.  They haven’t invested the time to plan ahead and decide who was their guy for the White House.  I believe that they became complacent after the midterm elections that brought a much needed victory to the conservatives.  A combination of the midterm elections and the outsourcing of political strategy to the Tea Party movement have weakened the overall strength and influence of the party the past two years.  The tea party movement was able to spark a new found patriotism amongst historically right wing voters and disgruntled Obama supporters.  They got the people out of the house and into the picket line, but the Republican Party dropped the ball by not saying “thanks guys we’ll take it from here.”  We constantly hear about a lack of leadership in the White House, but it’s safe to say that Washington itself lacks leadership.  Finger pointing and playing the blame game will not equate to a guaranteed victory this time.  The right candidate needs to inspire people to demand more from their countries leaders and remind people that despite our differences we all have one common attribute, we’re American.  To win the hearts and souls of the American people the right candidate must present to them feasible solutions to current problems with great passion and vigor.  With that being said, let’s delve into the current candidates and see what makes them suitable or unsuitable for the White House.

At this point, we can go ahead and break the candidates up into three categories too right wing, too complacent, and just plain unelectable.

The goal for the Republicans shouldn’t be to win the right wing vote, the keys to the victory are winning a majority of the independent vote and convincing the disgruntled Obama supporters that they’ll achieve change and hope with the Republican Party.  As we all know, right wing policies have a tendency to be perceived as very harsh by the public.  I admire their conviction, but leave the extremists to battle in Congress.  Rick Santorum is a perfect example of a Presidential Candidate who is far too right wing.  In an interview recently he said he would not only make abortion illegal but he would indict all doctors who perform abortions with murder.  Abortion is a very touchy topic in today’s society, people are very passionate about their views on this issue.  That is why potential candidates generally dodge direct questions on their stance on abortion.  It’s important to be pro-choice or pro-life, it’s important to have an opinion on such an important topic.  I’d bet that 90% of the country has a stance one way or the other on abortion.  Just let each state popular vote on abortion, rather than having politicians ignorantly pushing their stance on the issue on their constituents.  Mr. Santorum has been around long enough to know that comments like that can take the momentum away from a campaign.  I respect his conviction, I just don’t think he will not be able to get the necessary votes to win the White House.

Michelle Bachman is a very promising woman, she is Sarah Palin without the hockey practice and Moose hunting.  There are two things holding her back.  One she is a woman and two she is associated with the tea party.  I’m not saying that I’m against a woman in the white house, I just don’t think now is the time.  She would be a viable vice presidential candidate if she makes a good run for the nomination, but as of right now she isn’t the right person for the job.  Secondly her association with the Tea Party will become a problem.  Any hopeful candidate should acknowledge the success of the movement, but should stay away from being known as the Tea Party Candidate.  They are just to right wing.  Most people associate the movement with middle aged right wing racists.  This of course isn’t true, but it will show up in the polls.  This is a risk the party should make an attempt to avoid.  Tea Party Politicians will make great Cabinet members but they should stay away from the Presidency. 

The current favorite for the White House on is Mitt Romney.  He has the ability to raise an absurd amount of money very quick.  Unfortunately the most well financed campaign will provide the best results.  Although I do believe he is a very smart businessman and politician, I just don’t know if he’ll be able to overcome the failures of Romney care.  Healthcare is going to be a huge battle in 2012.  People don’t understand that there is not a great option for reform, there is only reform that makes things a little better than the previous system.  Also in 2008, Romney was criticized for adjusting his views in accordance with the most recent voting poll.  His lack of conviction and vague claims of business experience transferring to the White House is a bit of a stretch.  He made his money working in consulting, I just don’t know if he is best utilized as the President.  I think he is more suitable as Secretary of Commerce or a job creation czar of sorts.  He is without a doubt the favorite for the White House, and people support him because he is a successful businessman turned politician.  He is Donald Trump without the hair and moronic foreign policy claims.  With Romney though, the risk still exists that he won’t be able to get the necessary votes.  I doubt he’ll get minority votes, the under 30 vote, or the moderate liberal vote.  There isn’t enough flair with Romney, he will put forth Reagan domestic policy and stress the reduction of the federal deficit.   The fact of the matter is, he is the quintessential stereotypical Republican Candidate and they have historically struggled to get the important votes.

Not much needs to be said for the next candidate.  Newt Gingrich, well he turned on his own party he cheated on his dying wife and his entire staff has pretty much quit.  He isn’t a realistic candidate, his personal issues aren’t completely known and believe me if he stays in the race they will become known by every man, woman, and child in the country.  Appreciate it Newt, but we only have time for serious candidates.  Don’t forget that one of the main reasons John Kerry lost to George Bush was because of character issues.

The Last category is the list of unelectable Republicans.  This list consists of Tim Pawlenty, Herman Cain, and Ron Paul.  These guys are good people, but they aren’t ready for the presidency.

Tim Pawlenty has some good ideas, he is likeable, but he isn’t passionate enough to inspire people like Obama did in 2008.  His policies are way to cookie cutter Republican Platform.  He isn’t strong enough to beat Romney and if he isn’t strong enough to beat Romney he sure as hell can’t beat Obama.  Herman Cain is also a very good candidate, but he is a novelty.  He was the CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, he has real life business experience.  He is a very bright man, but his policies have not been articulated yet and he relies too much on the “I am a businessman” type of campaign.  I do believe that a background in business is essential for Political leaders, but unless he mans up and puts himself out there with new bold policies than his support will slowly taper off. 

Ron Paul is also a tea party endorsed politician, he is a libertarian which will be a selling point this election.  He believes in small government and free market capitalism.  His time has passed though, he is still too stereotypical Republican!  The Tea Party has provided him with a resurgence in his career but that resurgence isn’t going to take him to the Oval Office. 

Campaign season is still young and we are yet to hear policy ideas to put the country in a better place moving forward.  Repealing Obamacare and big federal spending will be a necessity in each candidate’s platform, but it won’t be enough.  I say they don’t wait until a week before the primary elections to release their ideas for the country, grow some stones and start talking about your policy ideas immediately.  I think there are two that we can start out with.  One the war on terror and two domestic job growth.

President Obama snagged a big W with the death of Osama bin Laden.  As great as that event was, it made foreign policy with one of our biggest “allies” extremely difficult.  Bin Laden being killed in Pakistan has opened up Pandora’s box of Pakistani defiance.  The war in Afghanistan has been going on for ten years now, and we’ve lost far too many American lives in the fight.  I’m all for fighting against terrorism, and ridding the world of third world tyrannical regimes.  At the same time though, we now have conformation of our suspicion that some Pakistani officials have been aiding the Taliban and Al Qaeda.  They are housing enemies of the state and in any other situation we would strike against their injustices, but it isn’t realistic with Pakistan.  They have nuclear weapons and we just can;t risk a full out war with an industrialized nation.  I don’t think we can continue the fight in Afghanistan at this point because the Taliban is receiving supplies and safety across the border.  If we can’t corner the enemy into surrender then we cannot completely win the war.  That means it isn’t worth the risk of more Americans dying in Afghanistan because we have limitations on how far we can follow the enemy.  The solution is to sanction Pakistan, leave the area, and allow the civil war between the capitalistic friendly leaders of the country and the Pakistani extremists to metastasize. 

Job creation is a tough situation currently, the only thing that can cause short term results in the job market is to incentivize hiring in the private sector.  Obamacare is a killer in this department, and the fact that we are in a Recession is still affecting the job market.  I think there are two problems with the US job market.  First is that the growth of new college graduates is growing faster than the growth of entry level jobs.  The fact of the matter is, not everyone should go to college.  There are only so many jobs available, any recent grads who have searched for jobs recently know this all too well.  I’ll tell you right now that Washington will not be able to grow private sector job growth with the implementation of any one bill.  Young people in school now have made their decision and hopefully they take advantage of the opportunities available to them so they can guarantee themselves a job after graduation.  Secondly, a lack of interest in vocational careers is making the job market too heavily weighted in certain areas.  This is where the government can affect the job market in just a few years.  The days of steel mills and manufacturing plants are over for the most part, but that doesn’t mean that these type of blue collar jobs are dead as well.  I think the federal government can implement full grants for people who decide to go to a trade school, and also provide tax breaks for businesses that hire new graduates of trade schools.  This will allow the economy to rebuild and provide a more diversified job market which is a necessity for the future.  The role of government is to pave the path for the private sector too walk down.  The current Republican candidates understand this but need to be more vocal about specific reform for current issues our nation is facing.

There is still a lot of time till November next year, so we are ok so far.  The good thing is that we have good people running for office, it’s too early to say who the favorite is yet.  If Herman Cain gets more specific and stops marketing himself as the ultimate businessman then he has a chance.  Mitt Romney is in the position to be able to be the ultimate candidate.  He can raise a ton of money very quick, people like him, and he has private sector experience.  He just needs to get down to the nitty gritty of his view on where the country should be in the future.  Lastly all of the candidates need to touch on social issues as well in the country.  If you neglect to address these issues, it becomes a campaign solely based on economics which will not get people emotionally involved in the results.   All in all, the field of Republicans could be worse.  Sarah Palin could be the front runner riding a Harley down Pennsylvania avenue screaming to lower taxes and watch her Reality TV show on TLC.

2 comments:

  1. I have to disagree with you here Mr. Faust. From watching the debate, Ron Paul was the only candidate that gave straight-up answers and viable solutions to problems without bullshitting or trying to run the clock out. Mitt Romney in my opinion is too much in the political sphere whereas Paul is straight up, about the constitution, and fixing shit. YA HEARD HOLLA!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ron Paul definitely did well in the debate, but just being straight forward on every issue doesn't necessarily mean that he isn't being political. He understands the necessity for private sector job growth and I'm sure he has some good ideas to back it up, althought his stance on foreign policy is a tad myopic for my taste. Claiming that social issues exist doesn't make you a rhodes scholar, it makes you aware. He talks about fixing the problems at home rather than sending money abroad. Of course that makes sense, but with out any detail it's too vague of a comment to bring support to his campaign.

    ReplyDelete