The Case Against Ryan
In his New York Times blog, Ross Douthat describes his "basic skepticism about the pick." A neat summary of the reason so many liberals have been giving each other high-fives--and why even a conservative such as Ross himself feels queasy:
This is a game-changer, of a sort: Romney has been running a cautious, content-free campaign, and picking Ryan will effectively force him to become much more substantive on policy, while giving the country the clearest possible choice heading into November. But setting up a clash of worldviews doesn’t address Romney’s most glaring policy weakness, which is the (understandable) fear among hard-strapped voters that Republican policies will benefit the rich more than the middle class. Ryan’s association with entitlement reform is at best orthogonal to that weakness, and at worst it exacerbates it substantially. What’s more, by picking him Romney may have passed up a golden opportunity to take advantage of the Obama campaign’s leftward tack over the last year: Instead of making a sustained play for the center of the country, he’s chosen to raise the ideological stakes.
This will make the race more exciting and more serious, and I’m looking forward to watching it play out. But I don’t think it’s made a Romney victory more likely.
Precisely by making the race more exciting and serious, I myself believe, Ryan will indeed make a Romney victory more likely. But I grant that the case Ross makes here is entirely plausible.
We shall see.
- Comment (43)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Someone I know posted this http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/08/11/paul-ryan-cracks-joke-as-71-year-old-citizen-is-forced-to-the-ground-videos/ on Facebook.
I have no doubt that it is rubbish, but has anyone seen a specific response. (The rapid response team at gop.com seem to be off for the weekend.)
Mar '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
About four years ago I was in my car in the evening. I was radio channel surfing when I came across Michael Savage. Michael described what would happen if Obama was elected.
Everyone used to be cognizant of the phrase, "trickle down economics." In describing what he expected of Obama, Michael coined the phrase "trickle up poverty."
I don't know if the Romney / Ryan team has an interest in this phrase, but it does point directly to what Obama has done. Less jobs. Lower income. Lost housing. Trickle up poverty. That, I think, is the message that would turn the election.
Jun '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
This comment would have been made had Romney picked any VP of substance. It's simply the next MSM talking point that was thought up 3 months ago... "OK, when Romney finally chooses someone, we have to paint it as harmful to him so we'll just say this..." Simply put in Rubio or Christie and the comment would've been exactly the same, word for word.
Peter Robinson:
This sure doesn't sound to me like a conservative talking, but merely a NYT mouthpiece. Oh, it's an "understandable" fear that Republican policies will benefit the rich more than the middle class? I guess the middle class voters love being unemployed so we better keep Obama in office, huh? Pretty pathetic.
Dec '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
The pick boils down to one thing: It forces the Democrats to start talking about budgets and the economy.
That's it. No more "Oooh, look, a squirrel!"
Nov '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Ross is employed by a paper that recently opined that Obama had to raise taxes on the rich before he raised taxes on the middle class, something he would have to do. C'mon Ross, get with it.
May '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Peter, I think the most interesting thing about Douthat's columns is that he completely believes the Democrats' "Paul Ryan is an ideological extremist" line. You see that he does when he writes that Romney has "chosen to raise the ideological stakes".
I'd ask Douthat, if I could, how Ryan ups those stakes any more than, say, Barack Obama's scurrilous ads or Harry Reid's outrageous lies? Ryan's plan, derided by the Democrats as "extreme" (yes, that's the word they use) takes about 18 years to balance the budget. We don't get spending to a GDP percentage near that of our historic revenue level (18-ish percent) until, I believe, 2050. Does that really constitute a "raise" of the "ideological stakes"? If Douthat honestly believes it does, then he needs to recalibrate his view of both conservative and progressive ideologies.
Mar '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
What have we been saying for years? If only someone would come along who could offer a clear and principled defense of conservatism, then we could really make a difference. Well, that time has come, and now everyone is getting wobbly.
It's almost as if Ross (and many others) are saying that we can only win if we don't tell people what we really think.The case will be made, and made well. The lines are clear and definable. Let us have it out. Besides, if Romney wins, the mandate will be important.
If we lose, then I guess it's off to the wilderness. But for now, it's time to stop the second guessing and give 'em hell.
Edited on August 12, 2012 at 9:35pmMar '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Indeed. I think people underestimate how much Ryan's plan has been defined by his critics, and how little opportunity Ryan has had to speak for himself on the national stage. When people who have bought the Democrats' line finally hear Ryan speak for himself, I think they are going to feel misled. Not good for Obama.
Jun '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
I'm of the mind that this election is a referendum by the American people on the fitness of the body politic to maintain a republic. In a sense the candidates are merely surrogates for two choices. If we choose the road of decadence, then the republic is lost. If we choose the path of virtue, we may have once last chance to save our way of life. Are we free men or slaves? Do we value personal liberty and embrace the requisite duties that maintain it, or do we prefer a government handout? Are we going to surrender and submit, or will we fight for the values espoused by our Founding Fathers? We're about to pass judgement on ourselves.
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Peter, it is time to stop reading Pravda-on-the-Hudson. You have to know that they would not hire and keep on the staff any Republican or conservative who was not a squish. When Douthat thought that Romney was running a "content-free campaign," he approved. What Pravda-on-the-Hudson wants is a content-free conservatism.
Just remember this: Empty suits lose.
Mar '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
The left views man as an economic animal. He ain't. All of the seminal changes in history have come by appealing to the nobility of the human souls. From Christ to the Civil War to Ronald Reagan and points in between ideas, not gold, have changed the world.
Romney and Ryan are focusing on fundamentals - patriotism, pride, self respect - rather than promising goodies. It is lighting a fire that I have not seen in 70 years. USA! USA! USA! It's worked before and it's working now. The gloom and doom crowd are about to be washed away and they know it. Bye bye.
Jun '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Paul Ryan can defend himself on the Left's turf, even granting them their choice of weapons. Also, as Jimmie Bise notes above, Douthat concedes the argument before the debate begins. Parallels Trende's counsel of despair about the blue collar by ignoring Ryan's ability to persuade "purple" voters.Projection, perhaps?
Dec '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
I think the comments are (mostly) missing the point. Douthat is correct when he says,
People feel like the game is rigged (was it Peggy Noonan who said this?). They feel it's rigged to favor Washington insiders and corporate insiders. Putting up a clear choice between statism and free-market entrepreneurialism doesn't explain how free-markets are NOT what we have and are NOT part of the problem. And fairly, or unfairly, Republicans = corporate interests. I didn't read the whole Douthat piece, but if that's what he's saying, I think he's right.
Romney/Ryan need to explain we're already living under socialized medicine, for example. And how's that workin' out for us? I'm utterly convinced Romney/Ryan can and will make the case, but just picking Ryan hasn't done it.
And, yes, having a clear choice put before this increasingly government dependent electorate is scary. "Sometimes, it causes me to tremble... tremble... tremble..."
Jul '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Wait, Douthat's a conservative? When did this happen?
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Beautiful.
Mar '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Stop bashing on Douthat - I don't agree with him very often, but he is making a valid point here.
In contrast with nearly every other Republican officeholder, Paul Ryan has clearly described how he wants to reform - and yes, shrink the largesse of - one of the most widely-used and popular government spending programs. If this is such a sure winner, why have no other Republicans had the nerve to get so specific about cutting Medicare?
And remember "keep government out of my Medicare?" From a Tea Party supporter? Behind the cliche, there are millions of Republican voters who are depending on the government to finance their retirement.
No one knows how the public will respond to a serious discussion of curtailing middle-class entitlements, especially those they have already paid into. Personally, I wish Paul Ryan was both the #1 and #2 on the ticket, but everyone saying that he's a sure winner does not know their electorate.
May '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
This says more about Ross Douthat than it does about Romney/Ryan.
Douthat talks about raising the ideological stakes. Well, guess what, Ross? Democrats are always ideologues. They are always advancing the ball.
The problem with the Republicans is that they have too many non-ideological technocratic tax collectors for the welfare state, always promising to give you the same big bloated freedom-killing red-tape wrapped-bureaucracy with a smile and outstanding customer service. Horse Manure!
Which is why so many of us were (are) leery of Governor Romney.
Mar '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
My Big Story of the Week (add guitar riff here): Obama will ditch Biden for Huntsman to try to place himself as the "true centrist" against the "extreme right" Romney/Ryan ticket. You heard it here first.
And just like on the podcast, if it doesn't pan out, you didn't hear it at all.
Edited on August 12, 2012 at 10:54pmAug '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
I agree with ~Paulus. Further, I will take the other side of the bet (for bragging rights only, I don't gamble) that the Obama campaign becomes more substantive than it has been to this point. What was the first Democratic response? "budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy, while placing greater burdens on the middle class and seniors" and "end Medicare as we know it by turning it into a voucher system, shifting thousands of dollars in health-care costs to seniors.”
The question facing the Republic is whether it wants to be governed seriously, or told happy stories, and whether it wants to govern itself, or shovel that task off onto someone else. At this time, I call that an even bet.
Win first - everything else comes later.
Jul '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
"Precisely by making the race more exciting and serious, I myself believe, Ryan will indeed make a Romney victory more likely. But I grant that the case Ross makes here is entirely plausible."Peter, I actually believe that you often grant too much to "the other side". I agree with your positions, but you have a manners that does grant too much, perhaps as a part of what you view as politeness, but I woUld say is allowing too much of their premises. Applied here, Douthat makes his point assuming this "classes analysis" and also assuming the the "middle class" voter sits there worrying about whether someone else will benefit more than the MC voter & his companions in the " middle class". These assumptions are the only way Douthat's point gets going.