A Second Hand Conjecture

Curious what Mitt Romney’s take was on Sarah Palin? Nah, me neither. But if you were, where else would you turn but to Hugh Hewitt.

No Comments »

NRO’s Veep poll. I voted for Sarah Palin, but she’s sadly in second place to Mitt Romney. I suspect Hugh Hewitt of multiple proxy voting.

No Comments »

Well, Fred wasn’t in the game. It seems to me, that both he and Rudy damaged their campaigns by not entering and participating early enough. We don’t get to vote in a primary here in Indiana for a couple of weeks, and I have a feeling the Republican nominee will be locked in by then.

Glenn has a few interesting links…

http://instapundit.com/archives2/014970.php

After seven years of watching and fighting against Americans who wish to see the country suffer so that they can get at George Bush, the last thing I wanted or expected to see was conservatives saying they would rather see the country suffer than support John McCain over Clinton or Obama, so that they can “get the blame.”

A retreat before victory is assured in Iraq cannot be undone in 2012. And mandatory, single-payer, universal health care, once established, will not EVER go away either.

Good point to remember come November, the choice isn’t between two evils, it’s between the less then perfect Republican, and the far less perfect Democrat. Who matches more closely to your view on issues? That’s who you should think about voting for.

Glenn also says “To me this seems like much ado about nothing. McCain and Romney are both moderate Republicans; the differences between them have been exaggerated by those who don’t like McCain, and don’t have much bearing on what’s good for the country.”

He also linked to the Corner, where Stephen Spruiell remarks about McCain’s speech last night. I wasn’t watching any coverage last night. We watched NCIS and House, then watched the local weather radar when the Super Duper thunderstorms that moved through our area. So, I looked up McCain’s speech on his website, and it reads pretty good. It will also be interesting to see his reception at CPAC. Given all this I would probably support McCain in the general election. I don’t know what choices I’ll have for the primary in Indiana, so we’ll see the day of what I do.

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/Read.aspx?guid=dd8d63d6-c35b-4af7-9684-cf8e9bcb118f

if I am so fortunate to win your nomination, I will work hard to ensure that the conservative philosophy and principles of our great party — principles that have done so well by the country we love — will again win the votes of a majority of the American people, and defeat any candidate our friends in the other party nominate. I am as confident tonight as I have ever been that we can succeed in November by uniting our party in our determination to keep our country safe, proud, prosperous and free, and by again making a persuasive case to independents and to those enlightened members of the other party that the great Ronald Reagan claimed for our party.

We will do it by standing up forcefully for those principles that have made our party and our country so successful, and by rejecting appeals for retreat and timidity in the face of the challenges of our time, challenges which are our duty and privilege to overcome. If I am the nominee of our party, I will not let anyone take this country backward to the days when government felt empowered to take from us some of our freedom to decide for ourselves the course and quality of our lives, or when we turned away from threats to our security that were so plainly gathering strength abroad. I have lived my adult life with one purpose greater than all others: to keep America safe from all enemies foreign and domestic. And I will never tire of the honor.

I am a Republican because, like you, I want to relieve the American people of the heavy hand of a government that spends too much of your money on things you neither want nor need, while failing to do as well as we should the things none of us can do individually. I am a Republican because, like you, I believe government must defend our nation’s security wisely and effectively, because the cost of our defense is measured in losses so hard to bear and in the heartbreak of so many families. I am a Republican because, like you, I believe government must respect our values because they are the true source of our strength; and enforce the rule of law, which is the first defense of freedom. I am a Republican because I believe the judges we appoint to the federal bench must understand that enforcing our laws, not making them, is their only responsibility. I am a Republican because I believe, like you, that government should tax us no more than necessary, spend no more than necessary, and keep out of the way of the most industrious, ingenious, and optimistic people in the history of the world . I am a Republican because I believe, like you, that it is the strength, courage, wisdom and patriotism of free people — not the government — who have made this country the extraordinarily successful place it is. My friends, my purpose is to preserve and strengthen our freedom, the freedom I have defended all my adult life, and I will not let anyone or anything deter me.

Nothing in America is inevitable. We are the captains of our fate. We can overcome any challenge as long as we keep our courage and stand by our principles. I intend to make my stand on those principles, and trust in the judgment of the American people I serve. So stand up with me, my friends, stand up, and together let us put America — her strength, her ideals, her future — before all else. It is an honor greater than all others to serve this country, the love of my life, and I thank you from the bottom of heart for helping me serve her a little while longer.

Thanks to Glenn Reynolds and Gateway Pundit for taking note! Check out Lee’s take on the ecumenical reform coalition. While you are here ponder Europe and the non-economic man, take a quick presidential quiz and see who you really agree with. Do some candidates supporters pose a public safety threat? Explore the African Oil Boom and ask yourself why this isn’t on more people’s radar?

UPDATE:

Another good point linked from Glenn, Ilya Simon @ The Volokh Conspiracy

Many conservatives either supported or at least refused to aggressively oppose the Bush Administration’s massive expansion of domestic spending, most notably his prescription drug and education plans. They did so in part because conservatives for a long time felt a sense of affinity with Bush and trusted him. There is very little such trust between conservatives and McCain. It will therefore be much more difficult for him to win conservative support for comparable boondoggles.

That, combined with the restraining influence of divided government, will make it much harder for McCain to enact major new statist policies than it was for Bush during the years when he had a Republican majority in Congress. McCain might even end up emphasizing his anti-spending instincts in order to shore up conservative support.

18 Comments »

It’s important! Please… pretty please. Republicans for Hillary! I am one of ‘em.

Hillary entered the race saddled with inherent weaknesses. She has the kind of negative ratings candidates usually have only after the battering of a general-election campaign, not before. Her political persona ranges from grim to charmless. She may relentlessly call herself an “agent of change,” but she’s emblematic of an entire era of search-and-destroy partisan politics.

She is the Tony Robbins of negative Republican motivation. At a town-hall meeting in Derry, N.H., back in January, Mitt Romney tried to stir the crowd in the immediate wake of Barack Obama’s victory in Iowa: “We cannot afford Barack Obama as the next president.” About two people applauded. The next day he mentioned Obama again, but added, “I can’t wait to meet Hillary Clinton face to face.” Sustained applause.

“She has tremendous baggage, high negatives, and she can’t be the candidate of change,” says a top Republican strategist who pines for her to be the nominee.

Obama may give inspiring speeches at campaign events thronged by thousands, but for Republicans, there’s only one candidate of hope: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

1 Comment »

My sister sent me this short quiz today. Sometimes they seem a waste of time - but - this one did appear to fairly accurately represent my views.

	John McCain Score: 44	Agree Iraq Immigration Taxes Stem-Cell Research Health Care Social Security Line-Item Veto Energy Marriage Environment	Disagree Abortion Death Penalty Gun Control Education

Enjoy!

2 Comments »

(Cross Posted at Whatif?)

When John McCain and George W. Bush were vying for their party’s nomination, I was a McCain fan. How could a person not be impressed by the man who refused to leave Vietnam’s prison camp to stand by his men?

As time has progressed, however, my admiration for McCain lessened. The biggest wound to my opinion of the man was McCain-Feingold. The notion that like-minded people are prevented from pooling their money and expressing themselves about political candidates has always struck me as a clear violation of our free speech rights. No arguments I have ever seen have even mildly dissuaded me from this belief.

Just in the last few days, I had some discussion with those who are strongly in favor of governmentally funded campaign financing. I argued that those with power and money will always find a way to influence politics; the best we can do is to insure that there is full and immediate disclosure as to where funds originate.

My friends responded that “no one pays attention to this”. There may well be truth in this statement. But I argued back that those who pay little or no attention are those who will be voting for someone because they are cute and charismatic, or because of some 10 second soundbite they saw in the middle of a reality show.

I then asked my friends about government financing. “Who gets the money? How much? When do you judge that others are ineligible for funding? What are the caps, and how do you determine them?” And so forth. This was met with: “We have discussed this before, and we will not change one another’s minds, so I am ending the conversation now.” How convenient. Questions are asked that cannot be answered - so the discussion stops.

Well, the discussion is not stopping for McCain now. With wealthy opposition, McCain is growling about his competitor who can self-fund as McCain cannot.

Money finds its way into the process no matter how many artificial barriers get imposed and artificial categories created for it. Americans express their support by their pocketbook — and they turn to other mechanisms when thwarted in efforts to directly support candidates. That accounts for the rise of 527s and their mostly-negative impact on national politics.

Now the author of the BCRA wants to complain about running against a candidate who self-funds. John McCain can’t have it both ways. If he dislikes the wealthy who have to spend their own money to challenge the power system, then get rid of the Byzantine mess that his McCain-Feingold bill has created — and its attendant insults to the First Amendment.

Is McCain being hoist by his own petard? Perhaps. We could find joy in a bit of universal justice at this spectacle. Instead, I would prefer to see this ransacking of our free speech rights simply killed and given the funeral it so richly deserves.

5 Comments »

Despite Keith’s wise admonition, many Republican leaning (or formerly R-leaning) voters have resigned themselves to the fact that Sen. John McCain will be the Republican nominee for Election 2008. That does not sit well with more than a few. Personally, since Fred! dropped out I’ve seen little reason to go on with life had little interest in how the remaining candidates shake out, except for praying that Huckabee does not get the nomination.

However, since there are really only four candidates left (or three if you accept McCain as a fait accompli), then it might make sense to start looking at potential VP candidates. Perhaps, with the right running-mate, one of the otherwise embarrassingly similar candidates will stand out from the rest. Of course, I can’t imagine that the candidates will give anyone a nod until they truly are the nominee, but that shouldn’t stop us from contemplating the possibilities. I’ll do the Republicans first, and then the Democrats in a separate post. (more…)

13 Comments »

Further conservative consolidation behind Mr. Slick. My friend the Huckabeeist has given in with an endorsement of Mitt Romney.

1 Comment »

As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney oversaw the implementation of state-wide universal health care, something that he touts as a major accomplishment on his campaign website. In fact, after signing the legislation into law, Romney penned a an Op-Ed for the Wall Street Journal extolling the virtues of the health care plan, even going so far as to hold it out as a model for other states to follow:

And so, all Massachusetts citizens will have health insurance. It’s a goal Democrats and Republicans share, and it has been achieved by a bipartisan effort, through market reforms.

[...]

Will it work? I’m optimistic, but time will tell. A great deal will depend on the people who implement the program. Legislative adjustments will surely be needed along the way. One great thing about federalism is that states can innovate, demonstrate and incorporate ideas from one another. Other states will learn from our experience and improve on what we’ve done. That’s the way we’ll make health care work for everyone.

Of course, many think Romney’s “accomplishment” is nothing to write home about, especially during a Republican primary race: (more…)

4 Comments »

This was a post better suited for yesterday and Fred’s withdrawal, but I suppose I let myself get distracted without posting it. It should go without saying that while I was unsurprised by the event, it was nevertheless disappointing. But not so much because we are now bereft of any reasonable alternative in the Republican field, but because it seems to confirm that registered Republicans by a large margin, are using unwelcome criteria to evaluate candidates. In fairness, that impression has been with me throughout Fred’s campaign, since I’d found myself to be fond of Thompson because of the reasons he failed to appeal to almost everyone else.

(more…)

No Comments »

Not too crazy about Mitt Romney but don’t know why? Amy D. Goldstein is ready to help. Among the many reasons you hate Mitt, is because you’re jealous of his hair and are a religious bigot. Yep, it’s true. *cough* Loyal Mitt advocate Amy has prepared a helpful eight point list of the most preposterously self-serving and stupefyingly propagandistic fake reasons for opposition to Mitt Romney you may ever read. (via coMITTed to Mitt).

No Comments »

The Maricopa County Republicans (McCain’s home county) held a meeting and had a straw poll on the primaries. McCain was voted “Most Unacceptable,” ahead of even Ron Paul. Fred Thompson won the “Most Acceptable” vote, but then lost to Romney on the nomination vote. Fred continues to be the candidate everyone agrees with, but no one will vote for. So strange.

No Comments »

The “Mittosphere”? Ugh.

No Comments »

At least the last sentence, my emphasis:

First he has no chance whatever of being elected President of the United States of America. He is a rich kid, yes so is George Bush as well - but George Bush gives a good imitation of looking and sounding like an ordinary Texan, Mitt Romney looks and sounds like what he is.

Americans will accept a Democrat who was born rich - they have more of a problem with a Republican who was born rich.

- Paul Marks, taking no prisoners

Via Samizdata

No Comments »

Can Mitt win against Obama?

The thing is… just about any of them could maybe win against Hillary. Or lose against Hillary. But winning against Obama is more problematic. People *like* Obama.

And is Mitt really that much better than Obama? Would it *matter* who won?

Giuliani or Thompson, as different as they are, could probably win against Obama. Huckabee? Not so much. Not because he’s a former pastor but because he’d be running against Obama’s strong points. Personality and likableness. Giuliani or Thompson would be running against Obama’s weakness, which is his lack of experience and lack of grown-up solutions to real world problems. Talk policy and Rudy or Fred can get into details and application (like them or not) and Obama really *can’t*.

McCain? Maybe he could pull the center away from Obama. Maybe he’d be the best to win against Hillary. Or maybe not.

Every little internet quiz I take comes up Mitt. But I’ll say this. I try to *not* pay attention and… well, it works for Mitt. He’s easier to not pay attention to than any other candidate still running on either side.

I think he’d be easiest to ignore on election day as well.

8 Comments »

Romney is walking away with Nevada and has declared victory. American Research Group’s last-minute poll in South Carolina picked up an enormous Thompson surge (to 21%). However the exit polls are saying it’s the McCain and Huckabee show. Byron York writes a fine but sad obituary on the late developing FDT campaign that could have been. The Ron Paul campaign is upset about something in Nevada and demanded a delay in voting, which was refused. Surprisingly, Hillary is winning Nevada (and yet Bill Clinton still needs a sedative). Plus Russ Feingold called, he wants his record back from Edwards.

No Comments »

Some people are very happy about the Michigan results: media firms. As Ken Wheaton  points out in Advertising Age, with there still being no clear frontrunner for the GOP nom, spending on advertising is about to go through the roof.

No Comments »

Mitt Romney appears to be calling for a government directed solution to the American automotive indutry’s woes. Marc Ambinder uses the occasion to point out that save Thompson, interventionist government seems to be a consistent theme for all the GOP candidates. How did this come to pass anyway?

No Comments »