The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
In her WSJ column today entitled "The Republican Who Can Win," Dorothy Rabinowitz describes the principles and attributes that define the candidate who can beat Obama in 2012. The Republican who can win must be able to make a strong case against Obama, explaining how the president's actions over the past three years have wildly deviated from what the majority of Americans find acceptable. He or she must also demonstrate a coherent foreign policy strategy. But most importantly, Rabinowitz argues, the candidate who can win knows that Americans are more worried about their jobs, their savings, and their immediate future than about abstract ideas like 'big government.'
The Republican who wants to win would avoid talk of the costs that our spendthrift ways, particularly benefits like Social Security, are supposedly heaping on future generations. He would especially avoid painting images of the pain Americans feel at burdening their children and grandchildren. This high-minded talk, rooted in fantasy, isn't going to warm the hearts of voters of mature age—and they are legion—who feel no such pain. None. And they don't like being told that they do, or that they should feel it, or that they're stealing from the young. They've spent their working lives paying in to Social Security, their investment. Adjustments have to be made to the system, as they now know. Which makes it even more unlikely they'll welcome handwringing about the plight of future generations.
The Republican who wins will have to know, and show that he knows, that most Americans aren't sitting around worried to death about big government—they're worried about jobs and what they have in savings.
If Rabinowitz is right on this utterly depressing count that most Americans really don't care a whit about abstractions like saddling up future generations with enormous debt, or government growing to behemoth proportions that will eventually strangle the private sector, then I fear that the "Republican who can win" might not exist.
- Comment (18)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
She underestimates our compatriots.
May '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
Diane Ellis, Ed.:
If Rabinowitz is right on this utterly depressing count that most Americans really don't care a whit about abstractions like saddling up future generations with enormous debt, or government growing to behemoth proportions that will eventually strangle the private sector, then I fear that the "Republican who can win" might not exist. ·
Not only that, but America won't exist for much longer.
Apr '11
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
The candidate will have to speak clearly on foreign policy—and begin, above all, by showing he actually has one. The near silence on the subject among Republicans consumed by domestic policy battles has been notable. Not till President Obama delivered his speech relegating Israel to pre-1967 borders did outraged Republicans come to roaring life—as Democrats, too, largely did—about a foreign policy issue.
I'd have to disagree with this part of the article. Foreign policy talk hasn't been as prevalent in the past couple years as it used to, but it's still there. I think a lot of the reason we aren't seeing Republicans criticizing Obama on foreign policy is the OBL killing. Not going after him on this at the moment, with OBL's death fresh in people's minds is understandable. Also, the debt crisis is real, and an existential threat to America. Remember Judd Gregg said the only thing that would pose more danger to America would be if a terrorist acquired nuclear weapons.
Meanwhile, I think the parts of the article Diane quoted above explain a lot of Mitt Romney's support.
Edited on Jun 4, 2011 at 3:46pmAug '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
I think Rabinowitz might be right. Even our esteemed Dr. Rahe was willing to back down on SS solutions when confronted with the "Insurance Program" myth. Older voters might not like Obama, but they fear losing "their" benefits. Even if those benefits are currently being paid not by the money they "invested," but by the money being earned by current and future generations.
People are self-centered and shallow. I have relatives who in no need of the SS income they receive, but they "paid in" and they will darn sure make sure they receive every penny.
Who cares that SS has included payments to Welfare and Disability since the Great Society?
Who cares that SS helped cause the breakdown of families who now think that senior centers, whose fees are remarkably close to SS payments, can take care of their parents?
Our problems loom large. They are social and financial.
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
I earnestly hope that you are correct...but I haven't seen all that much evidence (in polls or anecdotally) to suggest that she is too far off the mark.
Jul '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
"If Rabinowitz is right on this utterly depressing count that most Americans really don't care a whit about abstractions like saddling up future generations with enormous debt, or government growing to behemoth proportions that will eventually strangle the private sector, then I fear that the [Republic will] not [survive]."
May '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
This phenomenon that we are discussing is one of the reasons why liberal policies are so insidious. Democrat politicians sell entitlement programs knowing full well that it will engender a deeply felt conviction in voters that the resulting benefits are "MY stuff."
Therefore, any politician who wants to address problems (even if the program is proven to be unsustainable and it is a mathematical fact that it has been a fraud all along,) is seen as a personal threat and enemy to the voter. Hence, they believe that "Paul Ryan wants to take away MY Medicare" or, in 2005, "Bush wants to take away MY Social Security." Apparently whether or not the programs collapse before their own children or grandchildren can benefit is irrelevant to them. The attitude is, "those benefits are mine, mine, MINE!!!"
Time after time, Democrats step in and lie through their teeth, telling voters they will protect YOUR stuff from those evil Republicans. This is a powerful weapon for the Democrats. We have our work cut out for us.
Nov '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
Diane Ellis, Ed.:
Rabinowitz argues...
Interesting point by Ms. Rabinowitz.
My husband and I are a decade away from realizing any social security benefits if, in fact, they still exist in 2021. We have been savvy enough to save and invest over the years, (pretending these "benefits" do not exist), but truly resent the misappropriation and redistribution of our hard-earned income. I would propose yet a new entitlement reform bill : give back our FICA contributions (interest free) and let us take personal responsibility for our own retirement.
Jan '11
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
This article has been linked to/mentioned at a couple website I frequent. While I agree with her that we need a multidimensional candidate, I disagree with much of her premise. The issue of (over) spending & debt can be linked to so many of the collective problems we face. Does anyone think we have as much leverage with China & Saudi Arabia knowing that they hold a good deal of our debt? Could you please give women and religeous minorities greater rights - oh, and can we borrow another 500 billion?
The level of spending represents the size of government. I think the Republicans have not served us well in that these true costs/trade-offs were masked by borrowing & deficit spending. I've never felt comfortable when people state that spending is only 20% GDP. The point with this line of resoning is that we are not supposed to be a collectivist nation - using this percentage conbines the public and private in the same pool. It shouldn't be. If we agree that the gov't should spend 1.2billion a year, it doesn't matter what the GNP is they have been given their limit.
Jul '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
I started writing a comment about how I disagree, but she's mostly right. The fact of the matter is whoever wants to win should gamble only on Obamacare. Intrusiveness and rationing should be the lines of attack. An occasional dose of moral preening about the consequences for future generations would be useful, though.
That doesn't mean those should be the only differences between our guy and Obama, btw. He should be blamed constantly for American economic woes and our pick a card, any card foreign policies.
But the one clear as day chance to take (and it is a gamble, though I like the odds) should be a complete rejection of Obamacare. All of it. The popular pre-existing condition stuff too. If it's not wiped away, if it's amended, we may as well not bother.
Entitlements have to be curbed, let's start with the worst one. I think our candidate should be clear on Obamacare and coy on other entitlements.
The damned leftists have been (mostly, Obamacare being an exception) patiently driving America in the wrong direction. It's time to reverse course.
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
You've got that absolutely right.
Jul '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
Diane Ellis, Ed.
You've got that absolutely right. · Jun 4 at 9:46pm
Washington has run the country right off of a financial cliff, and people are seeing that, if not themselves, then friends and family are out of work, their lives on hold while Obama's gas prices soar and the working population of this country contracts. Not for their services, but from the above-ground economy altogether.
The issue in 2012 won't just be, are you better off now than you were four years ago, it will be, why did you ever trust Washington with this stuff in the first place?
I hear that Ryan's plan is the death knell of the Right. But people that can count know that Ryan's plan is the only offer out of Washington that isn't just better funded death panels.
Oct '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
Here's the Republican who can beat Obama.
Apr '11
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
Rabinowitz is right when we look at the confused moderates who ultimately decide our elections. This shouldn't be a surprise given that most accept the conventional wisdom regarding the role unemployment numbers and gas prices will play in Obama's reelection chances. Anyone planning to base their vote on such numbers clearly cares little for high-minded concepts, let alone future generations.
Any Republican will have to appeal to these people, as well as all of the other silly folks who vote based on hair, teeth, height, weight, style, speech patterns, coolness, etc. That Republican will also have to fire up the various factions in his (or her) own party.
A reminder that a presidential candidate must have the versatility to sell our ideas to diverse groups is an important one.
Jul '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
Yeah, that dude would wipe the floor with Barry.
May '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
You all forget to add that the majority of the people actually being screwed seem broadly ignorant of that fact and largely continue to support Obama. Their future earnings may be going down the drain, and their present earnings may be non-existent because they're being hammered the hardest by unemployment, but, hey, at least they're not racist! They voted in the first black president!
Nov '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
I was made uneasy by Mrs. Rabinowitz's article when I read it and for the reasons most of the previous commentators have named. Since thinking about it, I have come to wonder whether she did not discount too heavily the necessity for getting the candidate's base invigorated and involved. That, I think, will include making the appeal to reason (in economic policy and in foreign policy) required to settle minds like ours. Maintaining his credibility with "us" will be the foundation of the candidate's advance against the Democrats.
And, that will have to be done in attack mode. The slogans ought to be something like "Save Social Security" and "Preserve Medicare" and the underlying message ought to be that what is proposed is necessary to salvage the programs from their destruction by the Democrats, who are driving us blindly down the road toward a fiscal cliff and oblivion.
The Republican campaign needs to be governed by Admiral Halsey's order to his new command in the South Pacific (at a particularly low point in 1942): "STRIKE - - REPEAT, STRIKE".
Oct '10
Re: The Republican Who Can Beat Obama
The candidate to defeat Obama will have to be a big picture visionary, a la Reagan, vs. a technocrat (like Romney appears to be). The big picture guy or gal will be able to connect the social and economic dots, and be able to articulate the reasons why statism in general, and progressivism in particular, are harmful and destructive in the long term.
It's common knowledge that animals born into captivity are rarely able to learn to survive in the wild, on their own. Dependent humans also lose their ability to fend, or think, for themselves. Parents know doing everything for their children makes their children incapable of doing for themselves. This is a fundamental concept that a Republican candidate needs to be able to convey.
The other Republican theme could simply be individualism. Progressivism and statism conjure a world where profession and station in life are pre-destined. No taking time off after college to find yourself, no backpacking across Europe. Everyone is just a cog in the machine, a tiny part of the collective, meaningless without the State. This never appealed to me - I can't imagine it appealing to any young person.