Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
The further we get into the Republican presidential race, the more I'm struck by a sensation I've never experienced during primary season before: the feeling of being an observer at a spectator sport where I'm not truly invested in either of the teams.
That's one of the reasons I think the following, from today's edition of Jim Geraghty's "Morning Jolt" newsletter at NRO (subscribe here, if you haven't already -- it's mandatory reading), is so sound:
If you can't read any anecdote or account of your preferred guy and conclude, "Yeah, he was in the wrong there," or "Yeah, that's going to be a challenging weakness to overcome," well then, when you read or listen to or watch the news, you're not really trying to learn new information about what's going on. You're really just looking for more anecdotes and evidence to reconfirm what you already believe and know. (Confirmation bias, they call it.)
We all probably do this to some extent, but no matter how much you may believe that your guy rocks, the day will come when he doesn't rock. I thought what separated us from the "O-BA-MA" chanting cult of personality on the other side was that we didn't need to see our presidential candidates in messianic terms. For all the hoopla and the fancy plane and the band playing "Hail to the Chief," presidents are guys (and someday, gals) we hire to do a job under a four-year contract with a possibility of a four-year extension. We hope they make enough of the big calls right.
Representative government -- and life, in fact -- require a certain ability to see hard truths, mistakes, things that don't turn out the way you wanted. I'm starting to wonder if that quality is much rarer than I thought. I'd like to see all agricultural subsidies eliminated, but the votes aren't there (at least for now) and proposing the policy would make any candidate toxic and unelectable in big chunks of the country. I'd like to see a grade-A candidate in the GOP field, but instead we've got a bunch of B minuses, C pluses, and below.
- Comment (27)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Feb '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I now see I shouldn't have skipped the Morning Jolt today, I will be going back over it; but I am confused, does Mitt or Newt really have such fervent supporters that they fail to see there downfalls? I thought for sure they both have at least two-thirds of their voters seeing them as the least worst candidate. Which brings up a problem for our future nominee, isn't that supposed to be the view of independents that their candidate is the least worst?
Feb '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Like a Steelers fan watching the Ravens and the Patriots in the AFC Championship, hoping they both lose. This is a metaphor I really understand.
Mar '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Rumsfeld was only partly correct that you have to go to war with the military you have: it is foolish to enter into a war of choice with unprepared troops.
There are currently two wars going on, one of necessity, the other of choice. The war of necessity is the fight against Obama: there will be an election in November 2012, and everyone on the right needs to accept that the nominee will be weak and support him anyway.
The war of choice is the current battle over the soul of the Republican party, and it is utterly perplexing why anyone would want to wage this battle with such horrible standard bearers. Romney is a horrible example of a standard centrist Republican, and Gingrich is a horrible example of a true conservative.
Wouldn't it be much wiser to cut some losses and hold off on the intra-party death match until the Marco Rubio-Chris Christie primary?
Aug '10
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I don't think any of the candidates ever had a personality cult going. It would be impossible to find any GOP voters who think their preferred candidate will be a game changer, a savior, or The One Who Turns It All Around. (With the possible exception of Ron Paul's group, who still don't think he could enact radical change in the face of Washington DC establishment.)
Go back and look at all the defenses of GOP candidates, and I bet you'll find most of them are actually defenses against potential general election attacks in a matchup vs Obama. The rest are defenses against the "he'll scare off the base" attacks--also a general election worry.
In short, the bizarre aspect of candidate support now is that the base is thinking in tactical electoral terms, instead of purely ideological terms. The candidates, lacking compelling reasons to vote for them individually, are incidental. The pundits are pre-emptively defending the GOP nominee against future Democratic attacks; the nominee himself is relevant only as a bundle of selling points, not as a person.
May '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I am a bit depressed thinking about the GOP, today. Not only do I not have a "my guy," as Jim mentioned in "morning jolt" (to which I do subscribe), but I'm not seeing a clear frontrunner. More importantly, I'm not seeing any candidate who I really believe will win. Today, I feel like Mark Steyn; that we're all sitting in some sort of basket, and it's getting incredibly hot for some reason. I am not happy about it. My sincere wish that somebody new (energetic and viable) would join the race is seeming more and more like a pipe dream. Why don't any of these guys read ricochet? I am really at a loss for what the heck is going through the heads of some of those better candidates.
I am at a real loss.
Jul '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Mendel:
The war of choice is the current battle over the soul of the Republican party, and it is utterly perplexing why anyone would want to wage this battle with such horrible standard bearers. Romney is a horrible example of a standard centrist Republican, and Gingrich is a horrible example of a true conservative.
Agreed. Neither of these two deserves the sort of passion that is on display. It defies logic to fight such a nasty internecine battle for such pitiful spoils.
Aug '10
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I think both Dems and Repubs are guilty of projecting their wants and desires on presidential candidates. We become so personally invested in our candidate we feel that attacks against them are attacks against us, meaning that when anyone points out their flaws it's like they're pointing out ours. Hence we overlook those flaws. (I'm probably as guilty of this as anyone, btw).
We don't seem to do this with our candidates for local office, I think it's because POTUS has become almost mythical in our society. We give the office far more power than it actually has. Don't get me wrong, the presidency has a great deal of power but it doesn't control the economy, it doesn't control the climate and it sure as heck doesn't control how we behave as individual citizens.
Aug '10
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Also, I hate to point it out, but this is what happens when we decide the only thing that matters is beating Obama. We debate the merits of the candidates but end with "I'll vote for whoever wins it, because I just can't stand the incumbent".
The Democrats famously did this against George W Bush in 2004. Kerry had plenty of defenders, but never a cult of personality around him; his primary voters were all about tactical electoral considerations. The Dems were counting on widespread hatred of "the other guy" to pull in independent and centrist support for whoever they tossed on the ticket.
Mitt Romney is not John Kerry. All eight GOP contenders are John Kerry.
May '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Mendel: Rumsfeld was only partly correct that you have to go to war with the military you have: it is foolish to enter into a war of choice with unprepared troops. [...]
Wouldn't it be much wiser to cut some losses and hold off on the intra-party death match until the Marco Rubio-Chris Christie primary? · 7 minutes ago
Ryan, Daniels, Rubio, Christie and others had plenty of opportunity to run this time. What makes you think they or any others we may wish for would run next time? The time to fight for principles is always now.
Dec '10
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Israel P.
Like a Steelers fan watching the Ravens and the Patriots in the AFC Championship, hoping they both lose. This is a metaphor I really understand. · 20 minutes ago
That's funny. I didn't see you in the room with us . . .
Mar '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
You can't have a personality cult without a personality.
So we're safe on that score.
Feb '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
She
Israel P.
Like a Steelers fan watching the Ravens and the Patriots in the AFC Championship, hoping they both lose. This is a metaphor I really understand. · 20 minutes ago
That's funny. I didn't see you in the room with us . . . · 24 minutes ago
Remember, I'm in Jerusalem, so I knew the score seven hours before the rest of you.
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
We don't have cult-like followings for candidates because based upon our philosophy of rugged individualism, we aren't expecting much from them beyond staying out of our way.
The other side expects birth to earth security, so they are looking for a savior in the first place.
Mar '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I wonder to what degree that is true.... perhaps I'll pray to Reagan tonight for the answer.
Feb '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I agree, for the last 21 years of my life, I've been heavily invested and active in politics. For the first time, I am just sickened by the process, filled with gloom (I don't think any of these guys can actually beat Obama), and I don't fully embrace their policies.
They all have some good qualities, they all have some serious flaws, but this primary has been brutal. At times I thought that was healthy considering the fall opposition; but lately, I think no, it's just a sign of decline. The so-called "A" list took the easy road, and the republic is about to be swamped by nationalized medicine. As all my friends in the UK note, once that happens, good bye conservatism. Worse, the likely, or presumed front-runner isn't in my opinion going to reverse Obamacare.
I really am losing all interest. The one flawed man I have lately, if somewhat hesitantly, come to support has a mixed policy history, a petulant tone in debate, and a lot of "anti-gay" baggage for the media to feast upon, and his family may need him more. Plus he's down below 20%.
Desperandum!
May '10
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Boy, there is a serious history deficit here. Doesn't anyone remember how bloody the 1980 primary season was? How crappy the choices were in 1968, 1972, and 1976?
Obama is tough because he is a raging incompetent protected by the media's slobbering love affair on the Left and the perfection impulse on the Right.
Life is all about choosing- virtually all the time- between not-so-terrific and generally-worse. And yet, in an election against perfectly-horrible, we have this much trouble generating enthusiasm to throw out perfectly-horrible with a candidate who is absolutely a significant improvement, even if not-so-terrific when compared with Silent Cal?
We're the alleged adults who tell the kids that life isn't fair, get over it and go work with the material/opportunities/choices that are really available. Instead we sit here and whine?
If that is our approach, we deserve what we get.
Feb '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Duane Oyen: Boy, there is a serious history deficit here. Doesn't anyone remember how bloody the 1980 primary season was? How crappy the choices were in 1968, 1972, and 1976?
Obama is tough because he is a raging incompetent protected by the media's slobbering love affair on the Left and the perfection impulse on the Right.
1. I didn't have a say in 1968-1994 - so I can't rewrite history.
2. So what? The election of 1800 was ugly too - that also wasn't in my control.
3. I do have a say in the hear and now, and I have the right try to leverage the party that I am a member of and have faithfully supported for 20 years, and that is supposed to represent me.
4. Of course that's why Obama is tough, and that means we must have a superb candidate, not a bunch of retreads and third shelf bozos.
5. Perfection - jeeze - how about not going along with socialized medicine and a balloning national debt due to entitlements; and this from the party of free markets, free labor, and free men.
Spare me the "grow up" and vote GOP talk.
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Casey
I wonder to what degree that is true.... perhaps I'll pray to Reagan tonight for the answer. · 2 hours ago
Funny!
But I don't recall Reagan being a cult-like figure when we first elected him.
He grew into it!
Apr '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
Tommy De Seno
Casey
I wonder to what degree that is true.... perhaps I'll pray to Reagan tonight for the answer. · 2 hours ago
Funny!
But I don't recall Reagan being a cult-like figure when we first elected him.
He grew into it! · 12 minutes ago
The other example, Coolidge, didn't win the nomination until he was the incumbent. The only GOP pre-election cults I can think of in the last century are Goldwater and Paul (at least before you get into the whackjobs). Palin got a brief glimpse of a cult that might form, but never quite achieved stability as a personality deal. I'm not 100% certain that cults are always helpful.
Jan '11
Re: Some Sanity on the GOP Presidential Race
I pray that members of the GOP 'Establishment' (yes Virginia, there is one), read sites like this and realize the cauldron of disgust they're trying to keep a lid on. I'm not really excited about this GOP field of candidates but couple that with the stalled agenda in the House and non-existent agenda in the Senate and one can't help but be dispondent. The GOP has blown the goodwill it had in the 2010 midterms.
I've never been more open to a third party. If Romney get's the nod and blows it - or he wins and we don't see some dramatic shift, the GOP will go the way of the Whigs. There's no doubt in my mind about that. The Tea Party will split off from the GOP.