Does Paul Ryan stand poised…
…at the edge of the cliff, ready to dive in?
I respect Ryan, and I happen to think he’d make a good president. But I’m not at all sure he’s really going to take the leap. And is he too wonky to have much appeal?
The paradox of the 2012 campaign is that, even though Obama is intensely vulnerable, he will be hard to beat because (a) there is lingering personal goodwill towards him on the part of much of the electorate; (b) the press will try to destroy any opponent, and protect him; (c) a truly conservative Republican nominee will be painted as a radical [terrorist] Tea Partier; (d) Obama is still formidable as a campaigner, his preferred mode; and (d) the Republican field is composed of candidates who are mostly either weak or relatively young and untested. Now that Obama has been president for a term, he may be weak, but he’s no longer young (gray hair!) nor untested. The fact that he’s failed the test may end up being secondary.
Ever since the Kennedy-Nixon debates, looks matter in politics. Ryan looks nerdy and has a heavy beard.
Beyond that he has little executive experience.
I completely agree, Neo. Because of the combination of factors you list, Obama will be reelected, no matter how far south everything goes before the election.
It’s no accident that the Republicans are called “the stupid* party,” and Democrats “the evil party.”
Sigh.
Jamie Irons
*Note that I don’t think Republicans — either the candidates or the voters– themselves are stupid, just the party!
Jamie:
Don’t lose faith. A lot can happen in the next fifteen months.
Remember also what Harry Truman said: “The American people can always spot a counterfeit. Sometimes it takes a little while, but in the end they can always spot one.”
And Winston Churchill: “The Americans can be counted upon to do the right thing, when they have exhausted every other alternative.”
Four years of President Obama is a long time… and people are indeed paying attention.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
Heavy beard? Not the Paul Ryan that I just googled…. (I had to make sure!).
He’s a cutie!
I don’t care if he can win or not. Ron Paul and Rick Santorum and Thad McCotter are running and they can’t win. Ryan is an A-Teamer in a moment when we need our A-Team, and he can serve an invaluable function just by running. I don’t even think it’s a question: he must run. He has a duty to do so, and I think he knows it.
Firstly, if he enters the race there is no rationale for Mitt Romney anymore. Secondly, he will teach his competitors a thing or two about how to debate someone like Obama, which none of our current lot knows how to do.
Ryan is capable of – and has shown that he is – causing Obama to shrivel and disappear in debate, and all without getting acrimonious, demagogic, or “red meaty.” This is the art he possesses, and all of the other candidates need to get a big dosage of it. In short, they need to their game upped – big time.
Personally, my top choices are Ryan and Christie (as of now I slightly prefer Christie), and I don’t give a damn about “executive experience.” Far more important is a focused, cogent agenda; a personality that is conducive to team cohesion and loyalty; and an intuitive sense of how to sell a policy to Americans.
Perry is pure red meat, and I have not seen him get into a tussle where he had to blend trees with the forest. Maybe he can do that, but if so, no one is better poised to bring it out of him than Ryan. And, as I noted above, no one is better poised to expose how vapid Romney is.
I like Ryan too. I think, after Sarah, he has the most integrity. Big deal if he is a wonk; he’s a wonk in the right direction–limited government; and so, unlike Hoover, brings a great mind to the table that is not for, but against, big government.
I don’t share Mr. Franks assessment of how Ryan looks. In fact, he’s kind of got a “raptor” type of look, an eagle in flight.
For the raptor look of Ryan, go to hotair.com today.
http://hotair.com/
Needless to say, I completely disagree with Ed Morrissey:
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/16/a-potential-ryan-run/
If he thinks it’s more important to be consistent in our stand for executive experience than to put forward our best candidates (not the same set as those with plentiful executive experience), then I guess I’m in the Walt Whitman camp. Obama and the media had no problem attacking Palin’s “lack of experience” despite Obama’s complete lack of same.
Besides, the problem with Obama is not that he lacks executive experience; it’s that he’s a socialist. He wouldn’t be any better if he had experience. Executive experience is just a heuristic, a rule of thumb. It’s not an ironclad law. Aaron Worthing at Patterico, who has always said executive experience is an absolute prerequisite for him, today said he would make an exception for Ryan. Which is exactly right.
The implications of Morrissey’s stand are not pretty either. If Morrissey is telling me that I must prefer Romney to Ryan simply because he atrociously governed a state for four years and has run a business, I must respectfully say “Like hell I do.” We are not in normal political ravines these days, and notwithstanding that, if Morrissey wants Ryan to run for President later, then there’s better way for him to get “next in line” than to run now. What exactly do we lose if Ryan runs?
Anyway. Making a sacred cow of executive experience is suicide. It means, in practical terms, that we HAVE to choose between only Romney and Perry. I’m on the fence with Perry, though given the current field he is my top choice by default. Romney is a disaster in the making.
Morrissey is saying that this is the best we can – and should – do.
If so, it’s not good enough. And I for one don’t find that acceptable.
OMT – again Morrissey updated his post to add that turning the election into an entitlement debate will be a disaster, and that Ryan guarantees that will happen.
He’s looking at it ass backwards: the election WILL have entitlements as one of its main themes, whether Ryan runs or not. What else do the Democrats have to demagogue? The question is: Do you want your candidates to be fluent and versed on the issue or not? Morrissey seems to think there’s some escape route to avoiding the issue, and there is: nominate Romney, whose problems compared to Ryan’s are no preferable, and I believe far worse.
Ryan’s budget is a problem? Agreed. But it doesn’t matter if Ryan is representing it or not, because the media will be asking daily of whoever the candidate turns out to be, “Do you support the Ryan budget?” – and the answers they can give are obviously constrained to “yes” and “yes with some tweaks.”
How having a supporter who doesn’t understand the law defend that position is better than having either the creator himself or a candidate sharpened by his presence do so is beyond me.
Present.
I value governing experience. I stopped supporting Romney when he decided not to seek reelection as governor, and I stopped supporting Palin when she resigned halfway through her first term.
But Ryan is exceptional. (Exceptional in a good way, I should emphasize.)
I’m going to have to think about this one. I may still be going back and forth when Paul reaches his decision.
I’m high on Ryan as a politician and I hope he finds his way to the Senate. However, he is the author of the effort to privatize Medicare. The Dems and MSM would crucify him for that.
While the budget and debt are major issues, they are not foremost in voters’ minds. It’s the economy and jobs. Ryan has no credibility on that.
Whoever republicans pick will be the next President Simply note 47% voted against Obama in 08 when it was assumed by most he may be a sincere and decent leader even if he did lean left. Theres no way, given what has transpired, that number wont be increased to a landslide proportion loss for Obama in 2012.
But rest assured, the media will make sure it appears to be a close race or even a slight Obama lead until two weeks before the election.
A risky prediction SteveH, but a hopeful one. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t underestimate the stupidity of the entrenched welfare class and coupled with the far-too-programmed-to-ever-be-reached crowd, there is always cause for concern.
There’s one thing that concerns me about Ryan: his “magnetism” quotient, which is more important depending upon which theory of electibility one presupposes. The linear model states simply that a candidate who appeals to the broadest spectrum wins. Thus, the drive for the independent voter. The “discontinuity” (for lack of a better word) model assumes a more dynamic approach and simply asks, “who is generating more excitement?” Ryan does not seem to do well in that area, but I may be wrong on that.
Sorry, left out what inspired my above comment.
I think the discontinuity model is the more appropriate model and is the reason why settling on a candidate like Romney is fatal. One piece of evidence supporting the discontinuity model is also seen in the following article which states the sale of Obama souvenirs is tanking.
http://tinyurl.com/3dozrua
But what a lovely Veep candidate he’d make, especially paired with Perry…
I’m in agreement with SteveH. but with a caveat. I see BHO as very vulnerable. Everything BHO touches turns to ashes.
Nearly a trillion in ‘stimulus’ spending to keep unemployment at 8%, but does anyone here wish to raise their hand to affirm they believe there will be a vast improvement in the job market by 8/12 dropping unemployment to BHO’s magical 8%? Green jobs? There are no ‘green’ jobs, GE shipped them off to China Shovel ready jobs? Even BHO admits there were no shovel ready jobs. Obama Care? That’s going down to a 5-4 SCOTUS decision before 11/12. The moratorium on drilling? That’s not a popular policy. Civility in public discourse? People are being to realize BHO is as partisan and mean spirited as those he accuses of the same. And, then there is Fast & Furious stewing in the pot.
My caveat is that the GOP can not nominate Romney and expect to beat Obama. As far as Ryan is concerned, I think he can handily beat Obama. He’s young, earnest, knowledgeable, reasoned, and his greatest attribute is he’s not Obama.
What will Obama run on in 2012? Slogans like ‘Yes we did?’ Certainly not his record. The 2010 election was a referendum on Obama. Attacking the tea party won’t help with independents. His prospects are poor in battleground states like Ohio and Florida. His solutions are to spend more, tax more and increase regulations. I am sure Perry is thinking ‘keep those ideas coming.’
I’m not convinced there really is that much lingering goodwill for Obama. It never ceases to amaze me just how similar he is to our (in Australia) now ex-Prime minister (overthrown by his own party), Kevin Rudd.
Both have that ability to sound so absolutely reasonable, while being a disaster in action. Of the two, I would say Obama is the more charismatic, but Rudd the more competent. Rudd is presently one of the most popular politicians in the country, if not the most popular, and yet it is inconceivable he could win another election. He is popular because he has the ability to be convincing when he talks, but an overwhelming majority believe, while he has likeable characteristics, he was a very poor leader.
Obama, I think, has the same problem. He might be your favourite politician to want to have a beer with (and I’m sure he could be very charming), but I’m certain nowhere near as many voters really want to have him as leader for another term.
In Australia, the political left (our Labor party is the equivalent of the Democratic Party) is completely on the nose, and is polling at all time historic lows, both at state and federal level. Even in Tasmania (think a population smaller than Rhode Island, and a political culture as crazy as California and Illinois combined) the Liberal Party (our conservative party, the closest equivalent to the US Republicans), is polling a clear majority for the first time in decades.
Obama could turn it around by getting some positive results, and he might get lucky with the economy picking up. The opposite is however more likely, and there is likely to be a series of bad news ahead, with maybe a few genuine crises. What will be clear is that Obama has no idea how to manage the economic and foreign affairs situation, and all but the most die-hard voters will either vote for an alternative or not vote.
In 2009, I formed the view Obama was unlikely to run again in 2012, and I still think that is very possible. I also think it is very likely Hillary will run, and this time she will cream Obama (I’d expect him to drop out before the primaries ended). If not, I see him losing in a landslide to either Rick Perry or Sarah Palin (I’m still picking Palin). I’d go so far as to say I don’t think Obama will even win California, Illinois or New York. Ryan would also win, but I doubt he will run.
So far, Palin is running a perfect campaign — for her that is (it wouldn’t work with anyone else). I’ve referred to it before as the Walmart approach, going to all those places no one else goes, quietly building a strong base, while letting the Democrats and the Leftist press hammer other Republicans. Perry copping a blast works as a perfect foil for her, and makes it even harder for the Left to credibly pivot and then attack Palin (they will try, but I think she has their measure).
Re “Obama is still formidable as a campaigner, his preferred mode”.
This true, BUT. The “but” is the “Campaigner in Chief” label is sticking because it is so obviously true. First time around, the campaigning was impressive, and the expectations (ie for the non political junkies not paying close attention) were the subsequent governing would be equally impressive. This time around, even the strong supporters are at minimum having doubts. The better Obama campaigns, the more he reinforces the view that that is all he is capable of, especially as the economy (internationally and the US) worsens and he is increasingly seen as ineffective.
A mark of an incompetent person is that when the going gets tough, they retreat to what they can do well. In Obama’s case, it is campaigning. Nero fiddled while Rome burnt, and Obama will campaign while the USA slides into a deep, hard funk. And it doesn’t matter how effective the whole “its not my fault” theme is at first, because it will be impossible to credibly maintain it for over a year.
Obama has nowhere to hide.
Curtis – You nailed it. The “discontinuity” model definitely captures Ryan’s biggest weakness (I said I preferred Christie by a hair in my original comment, and that’s why – the old fire in the belly).
Parker – Yet again, we are in agreement about Romney. I agree with you 100% that we cannot expect him to be beat Obama.
Rathtyen – Interesting post! I’ll have to think some more about the scenario you depict, but the comparison with Rudd is illuminating. Let’s hope you’re right.
Romney is obviously popular but represents the equivalent of sticking at 15 in a game of blackjack. Which reveals a weakness with conservatism in its collective form. The timid offsets the bold, giving a milktoast result.
But even the timid are starting to understand these aren’t normal times requiring normal responses. And boldness (ie. Trump and Perry on offense) has a way of becoming infectious. And Ronald Reagan was the model for how it happens. But even Reagan needed the resentment of Jimmy Carter to exist to set it into motion.
We got 16 months. And we got Jimmy Carter on steroids in Obama. The formula is set for a change in direction like none of us have ever seen or even thought possible two years ago.
If we muster up enough courage, this won’t only set our finances heading in the right direction. It will begin defanging racial politics, class warfare and the problem of a corrupt media at the same time.
How about Bibi Netanyahu? A whole summer of Rose Garden-like lectures putting BHO in his place. How fun! There’s no greater joy than seeing BHO smolder.
In case Bibi’s birthplace is a problem, Paul Ryan has also shown he can make El Presidente seethe. As Kolnai indicates, he’s also got that Don Draper cool that would frustrate media attempts to marginalize him.
That said, I, too, lean to Christie. He’s shown he can get elected in a blue state, he seems hungrier (and not just for oreos), and he comes across as a winner