1. The Democrat won in NY-26 easily with 48% of the vote. Republicans are blind if they don’t regard this as one piece of evidence among many of a momentum switch. They’re losing the debate over Medicare. People don’t want it turned into a voucher–or defined contribution–program. Ryan is no “social engineer,” but for now he seems too extreme. As Steve Hayward has reminded us lately, the astute Voegeli book counseled compromise on entitlements (arounds means testing)–and not a dramatic move to a new birth of freedom (as the Straussian Tea Partiers like Paul Rahe have been trumpeting). Even Republicans should regard the implosion of the welfare state with some regret and as a problem to be managed. Nouveau Randianism needs to be put back in the Ayn jar–and the lid screwed on tight.
2. Giuliani is inclined to jump into the race. I’ll restrain myself from taking a cheap shot that would call attention to his irrelevance these days. Of course, irrelevance and being a has-been didn’t keep Newt out.
3. In response to the thread: I’m not certain Romney can’t win. His chances in the primaries, I continue to say, are pretty minimal, due to hostility coming his way from both Tea Partiers and evangelicals. If he were nominated, he’d have a shot if the economic anxiety was high, but he doesn’t resonate with “downscale” voters and we’re fooling ourselves if we don’t admit that “Mormon patriarchy” would become a big issue. He would be a good president.
May 25th, 2011 | 6:57 am
Peter, there was a third party candidate in that NY election who portrayed himself as the ‘Tea Party’ candidate. He recv’d 10,000 votes or so and that had an affect on the election.
Also, it appears the GOP candidate was a party appartchik, didn’t ‘excite’ the electorate, and consequently many of the Rochester area GOP stayed home. Which tells us we really want to nominate ‘Tea Partiers’, Straussian or not.
Re: the “implosion of the welfare state” I might suggest that, at least for Medicare, if market forces are not introduced into the mix there will, indeed, be an implosion. However, I do agree with you when you support ‘means testing’ and other ideas no matter how unfair they are to people who receive little or no benefit even though they’ve ‘contributed’ their entire working life.
May 25th, 2011 | 4:30 pm
Not to mention the fact that the previous Congressman was run out of office after trolling for dates using half clad photos on craigslist. Not all politics is local but some is. The combination of scandal, a third party spoiler and uncertainty over medicare reform in an aging, union dominated part of upper probably factored in much more than some phantom notion of “momentum”. If my food bill stays at 20% higher than ever before and it still costs me 50 bucks a shot to fill my (small) tank, I think I like the chances of seeing Obama gone in ’12.
May 25th, 2011 | 9:29 pm
Nationally speaking NY 26 looks like a loss for the Republicans a la Ryan. But as Bill Clinton said today, this would be a mistaken view. Clinton heaped all kinds of praise on Ryan, and said the Dems need to stop demagoguing on the unsustainability of entitlements like Medicare.
Still the Reps are in big trouble. Near $4.00 gas, near 9% unemployment, under 2% economic growth, low consumer confidence, political instability throughout the mid-east, worries about the Euro and the EU, China getting pushy, Pakistan saying killing bin Laden is an act of war, etc., etc. Opinion polls still show belief that America is heading in the wrong direction. Reps have a great opportunity, but Obama doesn’t get any of the blame when compared to whatever Rep candidate you want to put next to his name.
It is true, he can’t excite hope and change like he did in 2008, and perhaps his signature in the English Royal date book shows Obama’s wishful thinking that it were still 2008. That said, I don’t see a candidate that can beat him. Why? I think Obama can carry on the tale of having inherited problems that are structural in nature and that have nothing to do with his own policies. Add to that Pawlenty or Romney as an alternative–they have no excitement, and add to that in general the media still loves Obama. The fact that the spell checker underlines Pawlenty ought to say enough (or maybe I misspell).
May 26th, 2011 | 11:08 am
So I kind of agree with John, especially on Pawlenty of nothing.
May 28th, 2011 | 5:15 pm
2012 is shaping up to be a Bob Dole year for Republicans. It’s a shame. Romney would make a very good president.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact