Bret Stephens at the Wall Street Journal says they do:

As for the current GOP field, it's like confronting a terminal diagnosis. There may be an apparent range of treatments: conventional (Romney), experimental (Gingrich), homeopathic (Paul) or prayerful (Santorum). But none will avail you in the end. Just try to exit laughing.

It's not just the current field that Stephens is upset with. Check out the not-so-subtle dig at Mitch Daniels:

Finally, there are the men not in the field: Mitch Daniels, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Haley Barbour. This was the GOP A-Team, the guys who should have showed up to the first debate but didn't because running for president is hard and the spouses were reluctant. Nothing commends them for it. If this election is as important as they all say it is, they had a duty to step up. Abraham Lincoln did not shy from the contest of 1860 because of Mary Todd. If Mr. Obama wins in November—or, rather, when he does—the failure will lie as heavily on their shoulders as it will with the nominee.

He ends by saying that he hopes within four years the GOP will figure out if it doesn't want to lose, it shouldn't run with losers.

So, is this just a tantrum or is the party this doomed? And what are you going to do about it?

Comments:


dittoheadadt
Joined
Oct '10
dittoheadadt

I'm getting kinda frickin' sick of this ap-cray.  "Deserve" to lose?

What is this, a game???  If the GOP loses, the country loses, because Obama wins.  What are we, a bunch of grade-schoolers incapable of thinking beyond our own petty piques?  (I don't even know what a freaking petty pique IS.)

America hangs in the balance. No matter who the GOP nominates, it does not "deserve" to lose, because IT is not the body that matters.  America the Beautiful is what matters.  The future of the free world is what matters. For chrissakes, this ain't some academic exercise we're talking about.

What kind of boneheaded thinking even comes up with that kind of language, anyway?  "Deserves" to lose.  Good God.

Franco
Joined
Sep '10
Franco

dittoheadadt: I'm getting kinda frickin' sick of this ap-cray.  "Deserve" to lose?

What is this, a game???  If the GOP loses, the country loses, because Obama wins.  What are we, a bunch of grade-schoolers incapable of thinking beyond our own petty piques?  (I don't even know what a freaking petty pique IS.)

America hangs in the balance. No matter who the GOP nominates, it does not "deserve" to lose, because IT is not the body that matters.  America the Beautiful is what matters.  The future of the free world is what matters. For chrissakes, this ain't some academic exercise we're talking about.

What kind of boneheaded thinking even comes up with that kind of language, anyway?  "Deserves" to lose.  Good God. · 1 hour ago

I agree. The guy is an idiot. He's also a bonehead for calling out Jeb Bush for not jumping into the race. You see, Jeb doesn't care enough about his country to see we need him to go against Obama! 

Paul Erickson
Joined
May '11
Paul Erickson
R. Craigen: If the GOP thinks Gingrich is a wrecking ball in the room, wait until they put Christie in. · 4 hours ago

If he's a wrecking ball, here's hoping he stays here in NJ and wrecks a little more.


Joined
Mar '11
Tennessee Patriot

Repeat after me, and often:

As a rule, Man's a fool.

When it's hot he wants it cool.

When it's cool he wants it hot

And always wants what he ain't got.

R. Craigen
Joined
Nov '10
R. Craigen

I'm not saying that the GOP hasn't a right to draft, say Jeb, and I'm not in particular sympathy with the party brass, but wouldn't it be a tactical flop if they did?  I can think of a dozen reasons this would blow up in their faces, but the main one is that they are unlikely to siphon off very many Newt votes to anyone who gets parachuted in with the party imprimatur.  Such a candidate might get a few Santorum votes -- those with animus toward Newt but who can't stomach voting for Romney.  And they certainly aren't getting any Ron Paul votes.

What's more likely to happen is that such a candidate would split the Romney vote.  If what some analysist are saying (that the GOP wanted Romney to run against a split non-Romney candidate, to his advantage) this would turn the party's own leading tactic against Romney.  He and Jeb would go down together.


Joined
Mar '11
Roy Lofquist

The Democratic brain trust is going Truman with the "do nothing Congress".  You talk about your tin ears!  The "do nothing Congress" was the throw away line.  The election was won by "give 'em hell, Harry".  

Give 'em hell, Newt.

Adam Freedman

Michael Tee

Adam Freedman:  I don't agree with Stephens' conclusion, but I note that part of his column closely mirrors a comment I posted in response to James Delingpole yesterday: that voters are turning to Newt as the candidate with the highest entertainment value. · 2 minutes ago

Why would you denigrate the voting public like that? · 6 hours ago

No denigration intended at all. Entertainment is an underrated asset for a politician, see today's post on Newt's stand-up, and Peter's follow-up about FDR's famous Falla-the-Dog press conference. I like Newt, warts and all.

James Of England
Joined
Apr '11
James Of England

Adam Freedman

Michael Tee

Adam Freedman:  I don't agree with Stephens' conclusion, but I note that part of his column closely mirrors a comment I posted in response to James Delingpole yesterday: that voters are turning to Newt as the candidate with the highest entertainment value. · 2 minutes ago

Why would you denigrate the voting public like that? · 6 hours ago

No denigration intended at all. Entertainment is an underrated asset for a politician, see today's post on Newt's stand-up, and Peter's follow-up about FDR's famous Falla-the-Dog press conference. I like Newt, warts and all. · 27 minutes ago

Newt advocates say something like this quite often. Particularly in the form of "who would pay a million dollars to watch Newt debate Obama", and similar. I'd imagine that the same people would have felt exactly the same way about paying to watch Goldwater beat up on poor ol' LBJ. Of course, they didn't get the satisfaction of doing so (no debates), but I imagine that the delight of doing so would have been pretty expensive then, too, had there been a debate.

dittoheadadt
Joined
Oct '10
dittoheadadt
Furthermore, I think some of what we are seeing is the extreme fulfillment of my father's observation for the last few decades: we have made the process of running for president so distasteful and destructive that no decent person would consider doing it.

Really?  Mitt Romney's not a "decent person?"  Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, not "decent" people?  T-Paw and the Herminator, not "decent?"  Puh-leeze.

Just because the Party's Abraham Lincolns didn't run this time doesn't mean those who did run are indecent people.

As for being "doomed for decades," that was the prediction after 2008.  Those decades sure went by fast...by 2010.

Seems to me there's a lot of Chicken Littles in The Stupid Party these days.  How 'bout we start playing to win instead of whining about losing. 

After all, the actual election is nine months out!!!

John Marzan
Joined
Oct '10
John Marzan

Mollie Hemingway, Ed.:

Finally, there are the men not in the field: Mitch Daniels, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Haley Barbour. This was the GOP A-Team, the guys who should have showed up to the first debate but didn't because running for president is hard and the spouses were reluctant. Nothing commends them for it.

With the exception of Chris Christie, what makes Bret Stephens so sure they are the A-Team? How does he know? Especially in this tea party primaries? Look at what happened to Rick Perry and Tim Pawlenty. Look at the insanity of this freakshow called the Republican primary. And before perry threw his hat into the ring, wasnt he part of the so called A-Team? What makes people think Barbour and Daniels will be popular with the base, when they are the dreaded Establishment candidates being foisted on the tea party? isnt newt's resurgence because of backlash at the establishment telling them who to select? As for Paul Ryan, he is a one trick pony that, as far as i can tell, has no strong ties with the tea party regular folks.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In