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:
Jul '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
CONTINUED FROM ABOVE:I would think that you, Peter, do not subscribe to this "class analysis" of the American people and the way that they look at the world and how they vote. These are just constructions of Marxist sociology grafted into political analysis by leftists. I submit that we all need to stop granting any legitimacy to this "class type analysis" because when you use it, there are unspoken leftist assumptions imported with it. Ross Douthat' s point actually does not have any plausibility.Whoever is meant by the "middle class voter" does not look to make sure that a politician's proposals are going to benefit "the rich" rather than himself. We should not accept this and instead should state how our proposals should work, are designed o work and how prosperity will result and the prosperity is ratified throughout society. Peter, please stop being so polite. :)
Apr '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Ross Douthat is a good guy and a smart one. Poo-pooing his opinion simple because he writes for the NYT is childish. Those that read him frequently know that he's been a solid if subtle big C conservative.
His point is valid. Even so, I'm pleased beyond expression with the Ryan pick. I want this to be about a choice. I'd rather lose with a winner then win with a loser.
Jul '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
I meant "ramified" throughout society, but the spell checker changed it to "ratified" throughout society. OK , that too.
Apr '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
I just wanted to say this is exactly right. :-)
Independents mistrust the cronyism in politics. Republicans are guilty of it. Conservatives who don't acknowledge the legitimacy of this mistrust are deluding themselves. Whether accurate or not, the general belief is that Republicans are beholding to "business interests" and the rich. R/R need to talk about the dangers of cronyism and captured government in clear language and make the case for limited government
Western Chauvinist: 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.
Oct '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Ross Douthat doesn't like the Ryan choice? Let's ask David Frum while we're at it.
Out here in reality-land, Douthat's reservations are worth several points in the "plus" column.
Mar '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Douthat writes for the New York Times. Douthat mouths the position of the New York Times in his blog. Wow!! I doubt we'll win the vote in NYC. Wonderful place to visit. Scurrilous politics. I've been there several times. Walking around. Sitting at outdoor restaurants. Watching people. Looking at my wife and saying, "Another famous liberal." (I don't remember ever seeing a famous conservative in NYC.)
I have a pretty good constitution and the presence of those liberals did not disaffect my dining. Neither does their writing or political insight.
Mar '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
It's important to keep an eye on the enemy. . .
P.S. And I'm not sure Pravda-on-the-Hudson is the right term. Let's use Lefty analysis on this one: The Sulzbergers are a wealthy family. They run a newspaper to maximize their wealth and power. Hence it might be wise to start calling it the Sulzberger's paper. I suspect that's a far more effective way to highlighting its bias.
Didn't I read something recently about making them live by their own standards?
Jul '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
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.
We need to explode this idiotic line every time it's put forth. The top half of income earners pay 97% of all income taxes collected. Roughly half the country does not pay any taxes at all. That means that if there's a policy of tax cuts to be put forward, that's the policy - tax cuts - then those cuts must go to the people who actually pay the taxes.
The "hard-strapped voter" (whatever that is, can one be "soft-strapped"?) can understand that if his or her employer gets a tax cut, it's more likely that the business he's working for will survive, and thrive, thus keeping him or her in receipt of a weekly paycheck.
I keep hearing "on the backs of the middle class". Depending on how its defined, that can be nobody, or everybody, who pays net income taxes.
Jun '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Barfly: Ross Douthat doesn't like the Ryan choice? Let's ask David Frum while we're at it.
Out here in reality-land, Douthat's reservations are worth several points in the "plus" column. · 1 hour ago
Yes, I'm afraid you are right, Barfly.
I seriously wonder why Douthat wrote a book about religion. Was he expected to do so and that's why they hired him. Or did he do it to shore up his fraying credentials as a conservative. One thing for Douthat to ask himself: why did the NYT really pick him for a new columnist? Really, why did they?
Probably because he's a squish and malleable.
That said, I do think that the Ryan pick does raise the ideological stakes -- and right in the economic area of interest to America. So, good pick as far as I'm concerned.
Re: The Case Against Ryan
The line in Ross's analysis to which a lot of folks here seem to object:
"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."
This comes from Ross's blog, not his column, and I'll grant that he might have wanted to flesh out this point to the extent of another few sentences. But heck. We know the income gap has been widening--that is, that during the very years when Mitt Romney made many, many tens of millions of dollars, middle class income was stagnating. Add to that the constant demogoguery from the Democrats about tax cuts for the rich, Romney's Cayman Island accounts, and on and on. And? And heck yeah, it's understandable for ordinary Americans to worry about Romney. Ryan isn't an immediately soothing pick, the way that, say, a Tim Pawlenty might have been.
That's all I take Ross to be saying here.
Jun '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Peter, I'm confused: Does Douthat think Romney's policies will benefit the rich? Or does he worry about him being characterized this way?
Only liberals worry about Romney benefiting the rich more than the middle class. We know this is how it has always worked -- and indeed it must work this way. Why doesn't Douthat know this?
Anything that benefits the rich has the distinct possibility of benefiting the middle class. Anything that damages the rich definitely destroys the middle classes chances and pushes them into the lower class of dependency. Why doesn't Douthat know this?
Is he analyzing here or professing his own worries.
Dec '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
It is so disappointing to me that the Ricochetti are attacking the messenger rather than the message. I don't care if Douthat writes for the actual Pravda, he must be debated on the merits of his argument.
If Romney/Ryan, and conservatives who plan to vote for them, don't understand that the middle class (the forgotten men) are the most vulnerable to economic decline in a welfare society (which we undeniably are living in), they, and we, are apt to lose this race.
Look, if the average guy believes the system is rigged against him, he's likely to vote for the guy who promises at least a portion of the diminishing pie, while there still some to be had.
Romney/Ryan have to explain that corporatism =/= free enterprise and that they (we) are not corporatists. It isn't that free enterprise has failed the country; it's that it hasn't been tried for 20 years. Ryan can definitely help Romney make the case. It's just that we don't know what portion of the electorate can be convinced at this point, which may not be scary to you, but it is to me.
May '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Peter Robinson:
We know the income gap has been widening--that is, that during the very years when Mitt Romney made many, many tens of millions of dollars, middle class income was stagnating.
Peter, you're wrong on this one. Our own James Pethokoukis has written about income inequality many, many times over at AEI. On more than one occasion. And that's just the first four links in a google search, there are more.
Second, I tune out when I hear "middle class" in the talking points. Those two words have come to disturb my calm. We are not a nation of classes, where each is relegated and there is no mobility (I know there's a Reagan quote, can't find it). Instead of, again, accepting the premise, we need to explain the fault in logic. Most of us are poor when we're first on our own, then we work our way up. People at the bottom and top of the income scale are the ones who aren't there very long (h/t Heritage).
Was John Kerry's wealth ever an issue? He didn't even work for his fortune.
Oct '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
We have got to deny the premise that the Ryan budget is extreme. It saves the welfare and administrative state from itself. Just Scott walker did in WI. Extreme would be eliminating Medicaid and Medicare and half the rest of the federal government within two years. The Ryan plan compromises a lot for conservatives already in my view but it is designed to be something that is a starting point of something that could get passed in a center right country. This idea that it somehow paints a stark divide assumes that we are working in a narrow room rather than a football field. I think it is ok to make that assumption but we should acknowledge that is what we are doing.
Mar '11
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Well said. This is precisely how I regard the essence of this election as well.
If we succeed in this endeavor, we will be the first and highest example of a developed, large modern nation to walk right up to the brink of social democracy and turn away, disgusted.
Oct '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
We seem being having a "race for the bases" election, with Obama and Romney focusing more on maximizing turnout than appealing to the minuscule number of independent undecided voters. That's a battle we might win.
Aug '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
We spent a lot of time saying that 'Obama can't run on his record' — we were wrong. He is going to run on his record — the one that he makes up, and his advisers make up. Just saw an article in Marketwatch, that said the Right's claims that Obama was a big spender were completely wrong. Obama was the least big spender of all presidents since FDR. He was really very thrifty. Tricksy record. You couldn't count 2009, because only 4 months of fiscal 2009 were Obama's, the rest, and the stimulus, were all Bush's fault. Obama had nothing to do with that, and the teeny bit that was actually Obama's spending was just the small amount of the increase over the previous year.
And in Colorado Springs, he celebrated his success at saving the auto industry, and returning GM to the number one spot in the world. He added he wanted to do for the rest of the country what he had accomplished for GM. He's going to run on his record. Nobody said it had to be true.
Jun '12
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Calling Ross a conservative has always seemed a stretch to me, he has espoused expanding government programs but putting a nominal "conservative" spin on them. He at best is a big government conservative, who looks like Democrat lite. He does have a valid point that Romney needs to explain why the left propaganda about Republicans preferring the rich is wrong, but this can best be done, in my biased view, by educating the public on how exceptional this country is, and how policies based on conservative principles better all, as opposed to principles that make us all uniformly poor, in material items and in spirit.
Oct '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
I've always wondered why we struggle with this. We just need to point out that the wealthy voted for Obama in 2008. Why would we give them "giveaways" after that? Republicans worship entrepreneurs, not the wealthy--who, in general, hold no love for the free market and are more comfortable with Democrats anyway.
Jun '10
Re: The Case Against Ryan
Ross Douthat may be a republican, but he is no conservative. Ask him who he voted for in 08. it was probably Obama.