Happy Friday!
Last night was another of many debates among many Republican candidates seeking their party nomination to take on President Barack Obama in 2012. And again, most of the focus was between former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Texas Governor Rick Perry sparring over who was the bigger flip-flopper.
Unfortunately, I didn't watch last night's debate and can't really offer my thoughts intelligently. But after listening to National Public Radio and reading the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and the Star Tribune, here's what I gathered.
First, Romney is still the presumptive frontrunner of the party and performed better than Perry on the argument of who flip flopped more on the issues. Romney, by all accounts, looked and sounded great while Perry seemed off his game.
For the record, I think Perry will do fine in this weekend's straw poll in Florida, which is meaningless because it's not the actual primary. But his folksy charm won't continue doing him any favors if he doesn't do a better job criticizing Romney over issues like health care and defending his own stances on social security and immigration.
Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, who usually does a great job putting herself in the news for better or worse, also had a bad night. She's not owning up to her biggest gaffe last week when she told NBC's Matt Lauer that a mother claiming that the HPV vaccine caused symptoms of mental retardation to her daughter. Bachmann was given numerous chances to clarify her remarks, but instead shifted her criticism back on Perry and Obama. Without any clarification or even an apology, I don't see this issue going away any time soon.
My surprise, however, was former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and how well he is doing in these debates. He's putting himself into the debates not only giving his stances, but also attacking Perry over issues like immigration. Santorum is still a second-tier candidate in this race compared Romney, Perry, and Bachmann. But he's doing an OK enough job that he may actually have a shot of at least a VP spot.
What say you? Did you watch the debate or do you have a strong view of any of the candidates mentioned in this thread? Or do you like others like Texas Congressman Ron Paul, former Godfather's executive Herman Cain, or the Governor of New Mexico who no one doesn't seem to know about?
I think the best way to tackle the Tea Party is to discuss electability. The Republicans are waging war on an incumbent. They need not only the independent vote, they need the unhappy Democrats. By definition, the Independents are not staunch conservatives and will be unhappy with the most extreme Tea Party views. The Democrats may continue to be unhappy with Obama but fear him less than losing their hard earned civil rights on issues like abortion and gay rights. Unless the Republicans run someone more moderate, they will lose all of the momentum of disgruntled Democrats.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. I think that people are not looking for a middle of the road push over that doesn't possess strong beliefs or real leadership experience. The right conservative nominee can be elected only if that person has a real world understanding of finance and economics (not a career politician like so many that have driven our country into massive debt (both parties terribly guilty here)). This candidate would also need to appear to be genuine. I think that this election will revolve around the economy and many social issues (whether it is right or wrong) will end up taking a back seat. I really do believe that many democrats and independents feel that government expansion, spending, bailouts, and stimulus have gone too far this time and are realizing that government is not the creator of wealth in this country and are therefore willing to go outside the box and at least consider any candidate. I guess we'll see.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure if the previous post suggests that tea partiers are "extreme" or if it suggests that there are some "extreme" views amongst a few tea partiers as there are with any other party...either way here are my thoughts.
Despite the direct defamation efforts of many media outlets and extreme members of other political parties, the vast majority of the so-called "extreme" tea party are very compassionate people that are very concerned over government spending and its growing control of our economy. Part of the reason this party has exploded is because they either understood or recently learned that massive government spending and growth of government has proven to reduce wealth and independence in our country and will ultimately collapse individuals' American dream. Tea partiers are obviously seen as a threat and that is why so many people try to silence and alienate them. The majority are simply good, middle-class people, of all ages and parties trying to get their message of personal responsibility, personal freedom, and believe that citizens in this country are what make it strong and create wealth not the out of control growth and spending that has put us into this economic blunder. Tea partiers would much rather rely on local business, friends, and neighbors than social programs created by the government and generally have ambition to be self sufficient, as most people do, but this is becoming harder and harder as we have zero economic leadership in Washington, stagflation in our economy, consumer sentiment is at an all-time low, our new health care laws are and will drive the overall price of healthcare through the roof, and businesses simply trying to keep afloat are being regulated and taxed to literal death. Oh, and adding a tax on the rich, please tell me how that grows the economy? The bottom line is people waiting for the government to come and save them simply will not and cannot happen because wealth is generated from businesses not the government. When government tries to do this someone (AKA taxpayers) have to pay for it which disincentifies people to create wealth for themselves and their businesses. That is why our country is where it is today and why tea partiers believe it is imperative to get our spending and government growth on a sustainable long-term path.
There, I'm done with my rant; thanks for hearing my voice.