As if they need this. Fact is this one is totally getting away from them, and it just keeps getting worse. The more the Republican establishment tries to stop the bleeding the worse it gets.
Now as if things were not muddied enough and as if this primary season hasn't contained enough comic relief, we now have the tremendous specter of Ron Paul taking over the lead in Iowa.
I presume it is canonical that the Republican establishment-the RNC, Karl Rove, and thinking Republican who actually has a clue about politics-wants Romney. He is, has been, and will always be their choice. He may still win-I still think he's probably better than an even chance to win. There are some signs that Newt's wave has already crested.
Have no doubt, the party establishment did not want Cain, did not want Perry, and don't want Gingrich. But no doubt even worse for them now is the sudden surge of Ron Paul.
Paul is an interesting phenomenon. His supporters tend to be very loyal, and many of his supporters are independents or Democrats though he has many in the party as well. The liberals that like him tend to forgive him everything in exchange for him criticizing U.S. military unilateralism. Because he has been very vocal about opposing Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. many other things he has been vocal are ignored. Like just how deeply he wants to cut federal spending and that to his mind Social Security and Medicare are simply "unconstitutional."
Or his breast beating about a "coming race war." He certainly seems very preoccupied with race and if anything I think on this coming race war he greatly exaggerates it actually. American actually has had a great deal of racial healing in recent years-the election of the first African-American President was certainly one very important watershed. I tend to read Paul's overwrought prognostications as reflecting his own preoccupation with racial matters-I think he and those represents are far more preoccupied with race than today's average American.
To be sure the followers that follow him here are conservatives and libertarians, not the liberals. They aren't drawn to his racial rhetoric or his promise to blow up the New Deal. They simply ignore it. It's as if they only believe what he says about Iraq-which is over now anyway. Then too some may like his rhetoric about "ending the Fed"-an idea that is on the wrong track in fact. What we need is not-mostly empty-talk of ending the Fed but of seriously reforming it, basically on the lines of a Barney Frank; we don't so much need to end it as its "independence" must be ended, ie, it must be made politically accountable.
But liberals don't digest his comments on race and opposition to government spending. He means he is opposed to the U.S. military engaging in foreign intervention. He doesn't mean things like this:
"S. African gold shares have rebounded nicely since Mandela was elected, which may be proof that he's playing ball with the Trilaterals."
"It is an encouraging sign that the end of government as we know it may be near."
"It's the domination of the country by Washington that is driving the militia & other heroic movements around the country."
"Washington fears such movements, but even Republicans have no idea just how far behind they are in calling for fundamental reform."
"Psychologically, people no longer feel themselves bound by its dictates. Bill Clinton has discredited the whole federal enterprise."
https://twitter.com/#!/RP_Newsletter
That last one is a particularly interesting observation. He is still a long shot to win the primary-he is doing well in Iowa but isn't even on the map in other places. His win mostly will hurt the vanity of the Iowa caucus.
But his rise means even more muddied waters for the GOP. And while he likely wont win the primary there may well be some GOP operatives who fear this remote possibility so much that they are focusing all their energy on this and losing sight of the real objective-the selection of Romney as the only viable candidate.
No comments:
Post a Comment