April 6, 2012 12:35 pm

The Republican Advantage of a Drawn-Out Primary

By Sophie Fry

Many observers are claiming that Mitt Romney’s recent string of victories, and his mounting delegate count, signal the GOP primary is set to wrap up sooner than Santorum, Paul, and Gingrich have promised.

Permeating the public mindset and the media coverage of the election is the idea that a drawn-out primary will hurt Romney and the Republican Party in the general election. With Obama’s poll numbers on the rise, there seems to exist a correlation between the length of the Romney-Santorum  struggle and the growing approval rating for the President. Yet while we focus on the mudslinging and etch-a-sketch slip ups, we are losing site of the larger benefits of a protracted primary fight. The long primary may, in reality, be helping the presumptive nominee.

While an extra few months of intraparty bickering may not be ideal, there are significant upsides for the Republicans to the delegate-numbers race we currently see unfolding in front of us. Most obviously, it keeps the national attention on the GOP. Each and every day there is a new story or gaffe or endorsement is a day that the President loses some airtime to the Republicans.

http://www.politicker.com/files/2012/01/mitt-romney-getty1.jpg

The long primary and the contrast between candidates such as Santorum and Gingrich creates an interesting dynamic in terms of ideology: it makes Romney seem more moderate. For the sake of the primaries, this is not ideal – however, in the context of the general election, it appeals to the center of the party, who want a less radical candidate running. By placing Romney in direct contrast to Santorum, Gingrich and Paul, he seems like the most reasoned candidate in the field, which will help him with the critical independent vote.

This primary campaign acts as good preparation for the Romney campaign before they meet the Obama machine in the fall. It has, over the last few months, toughened up Romney, and the attacks levied against him have smoothed out the wrinkles in his campaign, while Obama, who has been getting less heat, hasn’t had the same opportunity to practice his parries. It also serves as Romney’s practice run, oiling the wheels before the larger campaign begins in earnest after the conventions at the end of summer.

Santorum recently said that, “in this primary, the longer it goes the better it is for the party…[it’s] a positive thing for the Republican Party.” While the lengthy primary doesn’t seem to have many benefits for him, he has definitely hit on several key aspects of this race: that while the national dialogue seems to proclaim the negative consequences of such a long drawn out primary, we may find that, come September, the benefits of the drawn-out contest become more evident.

 

March 22, 2012 12:15 pm

The Road to 1,144

By Raphael Haro

1,144. This number represents the number of delegates that one of the four remaining Republican nominees will need to reach to avoid a brokered convention. In the news lately, we have heard a lot about this scenario, where Republican delegates would fight to the death to sway voters from one candidate to the other. However, when looking at the math, it is pretty clear that although the primary will undoubtedly continue through June, Mitt Romney will eventually garner enough support to reach the magic number.

As of last nights win in Illinois, Romney has a commanding lead with 560 delegates to Rick Santorum’s 246. Even including Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul’s delegates, we see that Romney still holds the majority of delegates at 55%.

So what does this mean for the future? Well we start with the winner-take-all states remaining.
Read More…

March 20, 2012 2:35 am

Mitt Romney’s Harvard Problem

By Ross Svenson

Rick Santorum’s February surge underscores what many have been saying all along: Republican voters are unwilling to accept Mitt Romney as their nominee. While Romney has considerable political experience and remains the strongest threat to President Obama this fall, he has failed to charm the base. Romney’s image is at the core of this problem: Harvard and Massachusetts, long associated with liberal elites, are not popular attributes, particularly in the eyes of Tea Party members. Yet, Romney graduated from Harvard’s Law and Business Schools and served as Governor of Massachusetts.

These connections have reinforced the perception that Romney is “out of touch” with ordinary Americans. Romney has attempted to distance himself from Harvard and cast himself as the conservative standard-bearer during the campaign with mixed results. The right’s perception of Romney as disconnected will continue to haunt him throughout the nominating process, but it is unlikely that this would harm him significantly among Republican voters in the general election.
Read More…

March 7, 2012 8:13 pm

Super Tuesday Results Roundup

By Sophie Fry

Four years ago, the GOP primary race was effectively over at this stage of the campaign. In 2012, it’s not even half way there.

In 2008, Senator John McCain swept the 21 Super Tuesday states, winning most of the delegates and effectively locking down the nomination. This year, the biggest date in the primary calendar is unlikely to shift either the narrative or the outcome of the race. In contrast to four years ago, not only will half the number of states be voting, but the majority of them will proportionally divide the delegates. With only 662 delegates currently pledged (last time round, we had 1,068 pledged at this point) out of the 1,144 needed to clinch the nomination, this year’s Super Tuesday was only additional confirmation that the Republican nomination process is likely to stretch throughout the spring.

Although Super Tuesday is unlikely to be a gamer-changer, there are still key points that can be drawn from the 10 contest that we saw play out:
Read More…

February 19, 2012 9:54 pm

The Primary Parallel

By Humza Bokhari

Let’s take this scenario: A highly successful politician from a well-known political family decides to run for president, starting to unofficially prepare for a run years and years in advance. Confident about their chances, they assume the title of presumptive nominee far before the primaries begin.

But they can’t make the sell. Seen as polarizing, out-of-touch, and entitled, their support hits a ceiling. They lose Iowa after pouring in millions to a surging candidate people didn’t take seriously. They win New Hampshire, though, regaining the mantle of inevitability. Nevada bolsters their credentials, but their percent of the vote in South Carolina is embarrassing. And February is somewhat of a disaster, with the potential to hit the breaks on their campaign entirely.
Read More…

February 15, 2012 3:40 pm

A Different Look at Electability

By Alex Boota

A key question Republicans have been asking this primary season has been, “Which candidate has the best chance of defeating Barack Obama in the general election?” So far, Republicans seem to be settling on Mitt Romney as the most electable in this sense. But what exactly does “electable” mean?

For Republicans, electable seems to mean harmless, moderate, and politically adept; that is, while it may be hard for some Republicans to be passionate about Mitt Romney, it is unlikely that other people would strongly dislike him. Other candidates are more attractive to parts of the Republican Party, but they also tend to turn off independent voters en masse—Newt Gingrich has too much baggage, Rick Santorum is too socially conservative, and Ron Paul has too many extreme ideas that alienate too many voters. Or at least this seems to be the reasoning of Republican voters.
Read More…

January 31, 2012 6:26 pm

Romney and Gingrich Fight over the Airwaves in Florida

By Matt Shuham

The four Republican primary candidates are learning the hard way something that every orange-juice-drinking, airboat-riding, sun-bathing, Sunshine State resident has known for a long time: Florida is one big state.

All 50 of Florida’s delegates, now “at-large” due to RNC sanctions, are up for grabs to today’s number one vote getter, but Florida’s political landscape is truly unique. Pinellas County, home to Tampa, holds 26% of the primary electorate. Seminole County has 21% (Orlando), and Miami-Dade County has 14%.

That’s right; more than half of Florida’s Republican primary voters are split between just three counties. What this means for the four Republicans currently romping across my home state is simple: The battle of the airwaves will determine Florida.

Because of Florida’s size and diversity, it’s fairly impractical to try and win the state in a ground game, especially if the election is “winner-take-all,” as it is this year. Rick Santorum won Iowa by knocking on doors and stopping by pizza ranches, but in Florida, we have a name for the cross-state road trip: The 1,000 Mile Journey. Combine that with a reliable elderly voting population that would rather stay home than go to campaign events and the message is clear: stick to commercials.

So who’s the smartest guy in this regard? Mitt Romney. In terms of sheer numbers, Mitt Romney has vastly outspent any of his competitors by millions of dollars in Florida, and the results show it. Including the super PACs that support him, Mitt Romney has aired 12,768 television commercials in Florida as of Wednesday, according to a study by the Wesleyan University Media Project. Newt Gingrich and his super PAC allies have shown just 210. And indeed, according to the most recent poll by Quinnipiac University, Mitt is ahead 43% to 29%.

This influx of advertising is an increase for Romney compared to his 2008 campaign in the state. This is mainly due to the increased influence of super PACs since 2010′s Citizens United ruling.

So, what’s a poor old Speaker of the House to do? Frank Luntz said it best in a recent quote to the Washington Post: “Newt may not have the money, but he has always had the skill of grabbing attention.” Targeting Florida’s space industry, immigrant population, and huge amount of foreclosed homeowners, Speaker Gingrich is focusing his energy on trying to break Romney’s momentum. Besides his sermons preaching a moon colony, Gingrich launched fierce attacks on Mitt’s supposedly anti-immigration past. And increasingly, Newt is hitting Mitt where it hurts: the Governor’s history at Bain Capital and on Wall Street.

As usual, Newt Gingrich shines when he has an enemy. Mitt can count on the Speaker’s unrelenting wrath until at least tomorrow night, but it seems as if the sheer amount of money involved on Romney’s side will carry the day. For now, at least, the lesson is hammered home once more: For a precursor to Florida’s primary results, look to the TV guide, not the town bulletin.

Photo credit: www.adweek.com

January 29, 2012 2:15 pm

The Significance of Florida

By Jacob Morello

 

With the fourth contest in the 2012 Republican primary season just days away, the race in Florida has become increasingly heated. As evident from recent debates, tensions run high and attacks abound. The Florida primary may very well be the most significant election in the nomination process, providing the champion the momentum necessary to convince the GOP that he is the most qualified. Governor Mitt Romney and Speaker Newt Gingrich have fought tirelessly for the lead in the primary season thus far, and a victory in the Sunshine State would provide a valuable boost to the winner’s campaign. Senator Rick Santorum, recently declared the victor in the Iowa caucus, would also greatly benefit from a first or second place victory, as it would provide the spark that his campaign has lacked since his impressive finish in Iowa. Finally, Congressman Ron Paul, the only candidate who has not claimed a top finish to date, is perhaps most in need of a victory in the near future to provide confidence to his supporters and voters across America.

Photo Credit: David S. Holloway/CNN

Florida offers the winner of Tuesday’s election far more delegates, fifty, than any of the past three states, despite losing half of its votes (it had 99 originally) due to a penalty for setting its January 31 election date earlier than March 1, the earliest date allowed by the Republican National Party. Florida is one of five states, along with New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan and Arizona, to suffer delegate losses in 2012 for violating voting date regulations. However, the loss of delegates is likely compensated for by increased influence in determining the future of the election and this is presumably the Florida Republican Party’s motive for setting its date earlier than permitted. This highlights a recent trend of states attempting to move their primary election dates earlier each election year in an effort to be more influential in determining the nominee. A primary in a state such as Florida with an earlier voting date could play a significant role in the primary process, resulting in a candidate dropping out or gaining momentum that he rides to the nomination, while a state whose election is on Super Tuesday (when eleven other states are voting) is relatively inconsequential in determining the nominee, who may have all but won the race at that stage.

So who is in prime position to win Tuesday’s race? Following last week’s South Carolina primary in which Gingrich defeated Romney by a 13 point margin, Gingrich enjoyed a seven point lead in Florida. His strong debate performances were mostly responsible for this lead, in which his fiery rebuttals to Fox News’ Juan Williams and CNN’s John King received standing ovations and impressed conservatives. Coupled with Mitt Romney’s relatively dry debate performances and the criticism the Governor received for how he handled calls to release his tax return statements, Gingrich began to win over skeptics who previously thought he was incapable of defeating President Obama. However, according to the latest Rasmussen poll released Thursday, Speaker Gingrich’s lead has evaporated, as Mitt Romney has jumped into the front runner position, claiming 39% support in Florida, compared to Gingrich’s 31%; Rick Santorum has 12% support in Florida, and Paul (who has actually already moved to Maine to begin campaigning) has just 9%. Without the luxury of another debate, Gingrich may not be able to recover his lead before Tuesday.

The candidates know the economy will be at the forefront of concerns for Floridians, who suffer from a 9.9% unemployment rate. While all claim they will cut taxes drastically and balance the budget to reduce the U.S. debt, Romney has an edge as a result of his business experience at Bain Capital (though this has been used against him in recent weeks as well). Another issue that is significant to Floridians (17.3% of which are retired) is entitlement reform, and Social Security and Medicare reform are issues that all the candidates have promised to address as President. All candidates publicly support Congressman Paul Ryan’s proposals for reform, but none have offered specific plans that have attracted significant attention. These two issues, the economy and entitlement reform, are key issues in the Florida election, and will be in the general election, but no candidate has emerged as having the strongest, most supported plans to date, which emphasizes the significance of this election to the future of the primary season.

One thing is certain: Tuesday’s election has the potential to provide momentum to the victor and a major inhibitor to those with weak performances. And while the selection of the nominee does not hinge solely upon the results, it will likely provide clarity on the future of the race, with the hectic March rush just around the corner.

Photo Credit: International Business Times

January 28, 2012 11:59 pm

The Gingrich Appeal

By Frank Mace

The Harvard Political Review is a nonpartisan publication that strives to offer critical analysis and a wide variety of opinions and perspectives. The author of this piece is a US Associate Editor, and works as an intern with the Romney campaign.

Like many Establishment Republicans, I spent last weekend wondering what was happening to the world. Newt over Mitt? Why?

Because Newt is more conservative? No

Labeled “the least conservative candidate” by conservative standard-bearer George Will, Gingrich has often strayed from modern conservatism—here’s a (partial) rundown. He pushed the federal health insurance mandate long before Romney implemented a state mandate, and he later applauded the passage of Romneycare. He has savaged Bain Capital in particular and private equity in general, fundamentally questioning free enterprise and “embarrassing” himself in the Wall Street Journal’s estimation. He attacked Paul Ryan’s entitlement reform plan, the conservative political Bible, as “right wing social engineering.” He appeared in an ad with Nancy Pelosi pushing for climate change solutions, his immigration stance is well to the Left of Romney’s, and he was the victim of conservative rebellion as Speaker of the House.

If Gingrich had stood by his less-than-conservative beliefs, that would be one thing. He could say, ‘yeah I have some positions that don’t mesh with orthodox conservatism, but at least I’m being honest with you about what I believe.’ He hasn’t, though. He branded his support for a health insurance mandate “wrong,” called his denigration of Paul Ryan’s reform plan a “mistake,” and referred to the climate change ad as “probably the dumbest single thing I’ve done in recent years.”

So Newt isn’t more conservative than the alleged Massachusetts moderate, and he’s a flip-flopper too. We can rule out consistent conservatism as the reason for the Gingrich surge.

Is it because he is the populist in the race? No

Romney and Gingrich may both seem out of touch—Romney because he really is smarter and more successful than most, Gingrich because he only thinks he is. Romney is an elite by nature, Gingrich by choice. Newt is the author of perhaps the most elitist note in history in which he characterized himself as an “Advocate of civilization, defender of civilization, teacher of the rules of civilization, arouser of those who form civilization, organizer of the pro-civilization activists, and leader ‘possibly’ of the civilizing forces.” He was pompous enough to suggest he is such a good historian, not just such a good Washington insider, that Freddie Mac paid him $1.6 million for his opinion, and he has revealed that he made $60,000 per appearance on the speaking circuit. Personal qualities in general can’t be driving the Gingrich surge given his history of infidelity, ethics charges, Tiffany’s expenditures, and more.

If voters were looking for the most non-elite candidate (Ron Paul aside), they would have gone to Santorum, not Gingrich.

 So is it because Newt is better equipped to handle today’s issues? No

The central issue of this entire election season is the economy—Romney markets himself as the turnaround artist and business expert who will fix it, but Gingrich has no similar case to make. Romney’s strengths and the needs of the country overlap well, but Gingrich has no business experience to bring to the White House. Instead, he is a Washington insider and former politician, and thus he cannot speak to the anti-Washington sentiments and economic frustrations many Americans are feeling.

Voters may be looking for someone who can debate Obama in the fall, and Newt is a good talker, but so is Mitt. It’s not critical current issues that are behind the Gingrich resurgence.

What the Gingrich appeal is really about

If the Gingrich appeal is not about conservatism, populism, or solutions for today’s pressing issues, then what is it about? It’s about anger. Gingrich has been successful because he has been the maddest.

Republican primary voters are furious about the Obama presidency and the direction of the country, and Gingrich manifests that anger better than any other candidate. His tirades against the liberal media and personal attacks on President Obama are met with standing ovations and roaring applause. Romney, meanwhile, channels Ronald Reagan, cheerfully focusing on American exceptionalism and optimistically looking forward to an “American century” guided by conservative ideals.

The problem is, this isn’t the Reagan era. Just look at how many times per day Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment, “thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican,” is violated. Good candidates like Jon Huntsman and Tim Pawlenty who didn’t embrace the doctrine of anger have failed. Huntsman’s characterization of President Obama as a “remarkable leader” was a near campaign-ender in its own right, and Tim Pawlenty was derided for refusing to repeat his attack line on Obamneycare in front of Romney. They weren’t mean enough, mad enough.

In South Carolina, this primary was really about, to the exclusion of nearly all other considerations, who showed the most anger. Gingrich’s indignation may score him more victories, but only if Romney doesn’t take note. All Romney has to do is start spitting some venom. Candidates for public office attack and question one another’s character and qualifications all the time, but this is different. This is about anger for anger’s sake.

 

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

January 27, 2012 11:07 am

What If No One Wins? A Brokered Convention Is Possible

By Daniel Lynch

In the days following Mitt Romney’s overwhelming victory in New Hampshire, his route to the nomination looked relatively easy. He appeared to have won in both Iowa and New Hampshire—something no non-incumbent Republican has ever done. He was leading in the polls both nationally and in South Carolina, which has picked the eventual Republican nominee since before 1980, and appeared on the brink of going 3 for 3. Add to all this the Romney campaign’s superior financial and organizational strength, as well as the backing of many establishment Republicans, and it appeared that the nomination fight would be over before it even got started.

The Tampa Bay Times Forum, site of the 2012 Republican National Convention

However, that changed dramatically over the course of a week. Newt Gingrich, who has thrived in debates throughout the campaign, wowed many South Carolina conservatives with fiery performances in two consecutive debates. Romney, meanwhile, spent much of the week leading up to the South Carolina primary on the defensive about his reluctance to release his tax returns. Meanwhile, Perry dropped out and endorsed Gingrich; Santorum was declared the winner in Iowa after a recount; and Gingrich ultimately won a resounding victory in South Carolina, putting a serious dent in Romney’s aura of inevitability.

It is not yet clear what Gingrich’s victory in South Carolina means long-term. It likely makes Florida almost a must-win for Romney, while Gingrich needs to at least do well enough in Florida to remain a viable alternative in the eyes of voters. Even assuming Rick Santorum stays in the race following his third-place finish in South Carolina, he may not stop Gingrich from achieving his goal of creating a united conservative, anti-Romney coalition. Gingrich seems to have enjoyed at least a short-term bounce in Florida polls from his performance in South Carolina. Nevertheless, recent polls show an extremely close race in Florida. There is still a decent chance that Romney wins Florida and goes on to win the nomination, even if South Carolina allows Gingrich to carry on the fight longer than was once expected.

However, there have been some rumors about another scenario—a scenario which presently seems far-fetched, but might become less so if Gingrich wins Florida. Nate Silver wrote back in December that “Republicans are dangerously close to having none of their candidates be acceptable to both rank-and-file voters and the party establishment.” Indeed, a sizeable bloc of conservative primary voters remains unenthusiastic about the prospect of Romney as the party’s standard-bearer. Gingrich, meanwhile, is unacceptable to many establishment Republicans, who view him as undisciplined, unreliable, and likely to self-destruct in the general election. Gingrich has near-universal name recognition and an unfavorable rating approaching 60% among the general electorate, meaning that he would have an uphill battle in the general election, even if he could manage to stay on his best behavior. If the fight between Romney and Gingrich continues for months, both candidates may become so damaged that they seem even more unappealing and/or unelectable. This raises the question: what if neither candidate wins enough delegates in the primaries to secure the nomination?

According to MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, many prominent conservatives in Washington are “trying to figure out a way to get to a brokered convention.”

A brokered convention occurs if nobody secures a majority of delegates on the first ballot at the national convention. At that point, all delegates are free to switch their allegiances, and horse-trading and further ballots ensue until someone gains a majority of delegates. This has not occurred since the Democratic National Convention of 1952. The last Republican brokered convention was in 1948. There have been more recent conventions—the 1976 Republican National Convention and the 1984 Democratic National Convention—that began without any candidate having won a majority of delegates, but in which the eventual nominee won enough delegates on the first ballot. Whether by coincidence or not, in all of these cases, the eventual nominee (Thomas Dewey in 1948, Adlai Stevenson in 1952, Gerald Ford in 1976, and Walter Mondale in 1984) lost in the general election. The same is true of several other contentious (but not brokered) conventions in recent memory. Hubert Humphrey, nominated at the notorious 1968 Democratic National Convention, George McGovern, nominated by the Democrats at the contentious 1972 Convention, and Jimmy Carter—who had secured a majority of delegates before the 1980 Convention but had to fend off an unusual convention challenge from Ted Kennedy, who lobbied for a rules change to allow Carter delegates to switch to him—also all lost in the general election.

Many Republican voters have long wished that another candidate would enter the race. Several conservative favorites, including Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, declined to run, although some have continued to beg them to make a late entrance. A brokered convention could be the perfect opportunity for those who are not happy with either Gingrich or Romney to make a final pitch for an outsider to enter and save the day. Interestingly, Daniels was tapped to give the GOP response to President Obama’s State of the Union address, giving Republicans a chance to see him perform before a national audience.

The Republican Party’s rules could also increase the likelihood of a brokered convention. According to Republican Party Rule 38, “No delegate or alternate delegate shall be bound by any attempt of any state or Congressional district to impose the unit rule.” This has been taken to mean that delegates are technically free agents, even on the first ballot. Under normal circumstances, a delegate who does not vote for the candidate to whom she is pledged might face considerable opprobrium. However, that might not be the case if there is a widespread embrace of an outside candidate. Another rules-related issue that might increase the likelihood of a contentious convention, if not a brokered convention, is the fact that some states (including Florida) have disregarded party rules by holding primaries before party rules permit and by declaring their primaries to be winner-take-all. Thus, a candidate who loses such states could demand that some or all of their delegates be disqualified (recall the controversy over the seating of delegates from Florida and Michigan in the 2008 Democratic campaign).

The likelihood of a brokered or chaotic convention may still be slim. However, given the volatility of the current race, and the number of unexpected twists and turns so far, it seems that nothing is impossible.

 

Photo Credit: http://rncnyc2004.blogspot.com

January 25, 2012 11:19 pm

A Bitter Wind Blowing

By Jacob Drucker

The radio waves are heavy with the sound of presidential attack advertisements, and nobody seems able to escape unscathed.  Over the past few weeks, President Obama has faced a whole wave of criticism calling his presidency failed and his leadership ineffectual.  Others have attacked Newt Gingrich as unreliable, undisciplined, an embarrassment, and “chaos.”  Ron Paul has been branded as an egomaniac and a racist lunatic, among many other epithets.  Mitt Romney has been described as a vulture capitalist, a serial killer (if corporations are indeed people), and a perfectly lubricated weather vane.  Think the election is becoming vicious?  You ain’t seen nothing yet.

This campaign will go down as the nastiest presidential election in American history. For the first time, a president will run for office attacked by Super PACs which have unlimited money to spend, thanks to the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling.  To date, this race has seen Super PACs spend twice as much as the presidential campaigns themselves.  The airwaves in South Carolina have been so saturated with political commercials that they could devote an entire channel to air purchased TV segments.  There are only so many times one can hear that Romney is a perfectly lubricated vulture killer before the ads begin to lose their effect.

To see how nasty the race will get, one needs to look no further than Super PAC ads already on the internet and blitzing the airwaves of Florida.  No candidate is spared: Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum are featured in new attack ads. But the existence of Super PACs and free flow of money doesn’t necessarily mean the ads have to be negative.  The 2012 campaign will be so brutally ferocious because Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, assuming he wins the nomination, have nothing to spend the money on but attacking the other.  Neither has a record he can comfortably publicize in this race, which will invariably come down to choosing the lesser of two much maligned evils.

Let’s start with Romney.  He seems unable to pick a record and stick with it- there is the record of what Mitt did as governor, what he said he did, and what he plans to do.  The man has taken more positions regarding abortion than most Americans knew existed.  As governor, he passed sweeping health care reform, which is less than popular among his Republican base.  And before he entered politics, Romney served as the CEO of Bain Capital.  He managed to either create thousands of jobs or destroy thousands of jobs, or both, depending on whom one asks.  And these days, any ties to Wall Street are less than popular.  This leaves Romney with precious little private sector experience to emphasize.  He did successfully run the 2002 Winter Olympics, which has been conveniently boiled down to the important fact that he speaks French.

Obama doesn’t have much to emphasize either.  His signature health care reform remains largely unpopular, and Romney’s ties to it dilute the saliency of the issue.  Obama also bailed out Wall Street, which cost him support among Occupy Wall Street crowds, who just might take a break from their drum circles to vote in November.  Obama will focus on his foreign policy, which has been a mixed bag.  Yes, he got Gadhafi and Bin Laden, but he has been unable to do much about Iran or Syria.  Moreover, foreign policy chops simply do not win elections.  George H.W. Bush handily obliterated an opposing Iraqi army and won only 37% of the popular vote in the following year’s race.  Sure, Obama can take credit for some successes, such as bailing out Detroit and repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  But these will not change electoral maps.

The election will then focus largely on the economy.  Romney supporters will publicize pessimistic economic data, unfairly deemphasizing the severity of the mess Obama inherited.  Obama’s backers will play up the extent of the recovery, to which Republicans will point out that unemployment anywhere close to 8.5% is not very good by any measure.  And so the economy, finally, will lose much of its limelight.

Which leaves us right where we started.  Candidates will have somewhere in the ballpark of a billion dollars each to spend, and Super PACs will spend billions more.  Neither candidate seems to have much of a popular record to run on, leaving nothing but to do but assassinate the other’s character.  The election is going to get very ugly, very quickly.  When we really need hope and change, we will have to settle for smear tactics and personal attacks.

Or possibly a weather vane.

January 11, 2012 11:34 pm

Progressives Shouldn’t Vote for Ron Paul

By Sandra Korn

Glenn Greenwald wrote a thought-provoking piece in Salon in which he noted that progressives disappointed with Obama’s policies have a viable alternative. While explicitly not endorsing Ron Paul, Greenwald declared:

“For better or worse, Paul — alone among the national figures in both parties — is able and willing to advocate views that Americans urgently need to hear. That he is doing so within the Republican Party makes it all the more significant. This is why Paul has been the chosen ally of key liberal House members such as Alan Grayson (on Fed transparency and corruption), Barney Frank (to arrest the excesses of the Drug War) and Dennis Kucinich (on a wide array of foreign policy and civil liberties issues)…

… if you’re someone who believes that things like Endless War, the Surveillance State, the Drug War, the sprawling secrecy regime, and the vast power of the Fed are merely minor, side issues that don’t merit much concern… then lock-step marching behind Barack Obama for the next full year makes sense. But if you don’t believe those things, then you’re going to be searching for ways to change mainstream political discourse and to disrupt the bipartisan consensus which shields these policies from all debate, let alone challenge.”

Across America, progressives have expressed disappointment with Obama’s failure to follow through on campaign promises like ending Bush-era tax breaks. As Greenwald notes, the lack of truly progressive policy implemented in the last three years comes as a result not only of a divided and obstinate Congress, but from Obama’s own moves to consolidate power in the executive branch and extend problematic Bush-era domestic and foreign policy. The promise of a viable candidate who might endorse an end to an unnecessary and unjustified foreign war that has killed hundreds of thousands, who might end the racist and expensive “War on Drugs,” and who might actually check corporate influence in government seems promising.

However, Ron Paul is not that candidate. Although he may support legislation introduced by progressives, he comes to his decisions from a single-minded desire to decrease the size of the federal government. Paul’s anarchist-leaning political thought dictates his policy decisions (with the single exception of abortion, which he incomprehensibly thinks should be illegal).

Libertarian reasoning leads Ron Paul to endorse policies that no progressive could support. Although Paul opposes the War on Drugs, which many cite as a racist policy that predominantly incarcerates African-American and Latino men, he also opposes policies like birthright citizenship and welfare that benefit American communities of color. (Paul also opposes any form of legal amnesty for undocumented immigrants, such as the DREAM Act, and has even spoken out against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and opposed other civil rights legislation.) He even opposes the very existence of an income tax in favor of a Flat Tax, which progressives know would place America’s tax burden disproportionately on the poor.

Vote-mongering and corporate lobbying may compromise Obama’s progressivism. But his background and campaign platform suggest that he at least cares about rectifying race- and class-based oppression. On the contrary, Ron Paul’s concern about the free market and individual liberty comes at the expense of the equality, social justice, and basic right to economic insecurity valued by progressives.

When Ron Paul’s libertarian interests align with progressive interests, he can certainly provide valuable support for liberal House members, as Greenwald referenced. In fact, Paul has effectively and admirably brought many often-controversial policies to mainstream political discussion. His opinions have sparked constructive and interesting discussion, both on this website and across America, about issues ranging from the War on Drugs to American intervention in Israel to war.

However, for every Paul position countering existing economic inequality in America, another ten would perpetuate or worsen existing wealth disparities. Ron Paul may be an interesting, controversial, and perhaps even viable candidate for the 2012 presidency—but he is certainly not a progressive one.

January 9, 2012 4:50 pm

HPR’s 2012 New Hampshire Primary Live Blog

By HPR

Join us on Tuesday evening at 8 PM to hear from four panelists on our U.S. Team and discuss the results of this contest and its implications on the 2012 GOP presidential nomination race.

January 7, 2012 6:12 pm

Why New Hampshire Matters

By Alexander Chen

Tuesday’s photo finish in Iowa cemented Rick Santorum’s emergence as the latest anti-Romney in the GOP race. Several candidates are now campaigning in New Hampshire, a tiny New England state with a contrarian streak. With Romney cruising in the polls and only 12 delegates at stake, HPR alum Alex Burns recently wrote  that next Tuesday’s contest would not be important, something most GOP contenders are likely to reiterate. Nevertheless, the first in the nation primary will have key implications for the Republican nomination contest, and cannot be ignored. Here are three storylines I’ll be following:

The Gingrich Factor

Blitzed by Romney’s Restore our Future super-PAC and quixotic Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the former Speaker’s political standing fell precipitously and Gingrich came away soundly defeated in Iowa. But, the wounded Gingrich is furious, and his concession speech was anything but conciliatory. He has effectively taken a berserker posture, implicitly promising to take Romney down at any cost and proposing a conservative alliance between himself, Perry, and Santorum.

Unlike Perry and Santorum though, Gingrich has a strong ally in the Granite State, New Hampshire Union Leader publisher Joseph McQuaid. McQuaid, whose paper endorsed Gingrich late last year, is a titan in NH conservative circles. He eviscerated Romney four years ago, and has already hammered the former Massachusetts governor for being another “squishy-moderate Republican”.

Meanwhile, Gingrich’s pledge to maintain a positive campaign has been thrown out the window. His campaign is already blanketing the state with television and newspaper ads attempting to contrast himself with Romney. Furthermore, look for Gingrich to broadside Romney in two debates this weekend. Gingrich’s attacks could very well diminish Romney’s final performance here, gift-wrapping a present to Santorum.

Can Huntsman Survive?

The Huntsman campaign has stumbled badly over the past few months: his service to the Obama administration as Ambassador to China hurt his standing with rank and file Republicans, and the media certainly did not help by anointing him the “moderate” in the race. His campaign narrative emphasizing bipartisanship disastrously misread the mood of the GOP electorate, which wanted someone to pugnaciously take on Obama.

The NH electorate is tailor-made for someone like Huntsman: state laws allow the independents and Democrats Huntsman is banking on to vote in the primary, and the state lacks a strong social conservative presence. He has put more time into New Hampshire than any other candidate, holding hundreds of events and bypassing other states. But, he trails Romney by approximately 30 percentage points in recent polling. Huntsman’s limited fundraising will assuredly dry up without a strong showing here, and should he poll a distant third or fourth behind Romney and Paul, his campaign will likely end.

Santorum’s Staying Power

Santorum’s emphasis on family values won him the endorsement of Iowa heavy hitter Bob Vander Plaats, whose backing provided a critical conservative seal of approval. However, New Hampshire is considerably less religious than Iowa, and Santorum’s economic populism (for example, he proposes eliminating the corporate tax entirely for manufacturers) may not resonate here.

Nevertheless, for Santorum to demonstrate his viability as a national candidate, he must exceed expectations. No Republican has won the nomination in the past half century without placing first or second in New Hampshire. Given that Romney’s expectations for the state are stratospheric, a strong second or third place finish for Santorum would dominate the post-primary narrative and position him to consolidate the anti-Romney vote in South Carolina. A distant finish, coupled with Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich’s continued presence in the race, would likely relegate Santorum as perhaps the final anti-Romney to emerge.

Photo Credit: The Boston Gobe

custom writing

  • I acquiesce I as-a-rule refer particular custom writing capitally and I at-large have formidable feast from successful work of wonderful experts. My prompt bought runs are made by censorious sterns and by clean-cut proposal. To disburse my empty time I call substantive behalf. I generally arouse to my kid friends to go it too. I look they directly will be decidedly joyful.