And then there were two

ADDITIONAL:  I could not resist adding this scorching  put-down of Mitt Romney in a 'cheer leader' piece for Gingrich by Jed Babbin in The American Spectator:

Mitt Romney is the Republican version of Al Gore.

Ouch!

................................................................................................................................

All the fuss and furore 'just over there' has meant that I have taken my eyes off the political 'Washington Derby' taking place 'over there'.  However, I did save an excellent piece by Ross Kaminsky in The American Spectator a few days ago in which he attempts to draw up a score sheet for the two front runners in the GOP race - Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.

In essence, he suggests, there are two criteria by which they should be judged: their conservatism and their electability.  On the first, he suggests that there is lttle to choose between them.  Both have rickety-rackety histories indicating that mere ideology is not important in their political lives, or at least, as important as actually winning and holding power.  Equally, when it comes to winning a presidential fight involving the whole American electorate, as opposed to a nomination involving only Republican voters, they both have strengths and oddly enough, their weaknesses - that is, 'weaknesses' as judged by conservatives - would be virtues as they appeal to a wider swathe of non-Republican people.

In very round terms, Kaminsky thinks that on the whole Romney is probably slightly more electable against Obama than Gingrich.  And of course, as I never stop banging on here, it is absolutely crucial that Obama and all his neo-Marxist gang are swept from office next year!  Needless to say, Glenn Beck has lobbed a grenade into the fray by suggesting that if either of those two win the nomination and Ron Paul, the arch-libertarian and isolationist, were to stand as a Third Party candidate he would vote for him.  If Paul did that it might turn out to be a life-line for Obama.

Perhaps just as important as the presidential race is the Congressional election.  If the Republicans can gain control of both Houses they would keep both Obama and any wayward Republican on a leash.  Finally, and even more important than anything is that if a Republican wins the White House he will choose the next one or even two Justices to the Supreme Court and in the long term they are more influential than any president.  But do read Kaminsky's article, well worth it.

 

Comments

[Dom]

I thought this was interesting:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70318.html#ixzz1gNSjzBc6

Across the board, Americans are getting pretty tired of big government.

[David Duff]

Thanks, Dom, I saw mention of that poll somewhere else. I remain convinced Obama will be out by this time next year. However, my forecasting record is, um, less than brilliant!

[JK]

Suggests, "mere ideology is not important in their political lives, or at least, as important as actually winning and holding power."

It would have been better rendered as having no bedrock ideology if it comes to deciding between these two - neither the DNC or Obama will need spend much on campaign attack ads.

It will not be either the Republicans or the Democrats who will, indeed must pinch their nostrils tight and pull the lever - it will be the non-affiliated Independents. And that choice will be made come the results of the South's "Super Tuesday."

If either of the two forementioned garner a majority - if you're to be wagering - place your bets on Obama.

Out on a limb here - the Senate will have the Dems with a slim 5-seat majority.

[David Duff]

I agree that the independents will be hugely influential but from every poll I have seen they do not seem to like Obama too much! A relatively mild Republican should pick up most their vote.

As for the Senate I simply do not know enough of the detail but even if the Dems hold an ultra-slim majority, usually some of the Southern Dems are more Right-wing than the Republicans - DINOs rather than RINOs!

[JK]

You are correct about the southern Dems of course, the saying in Arkansas is: "We want our candidates to run as Democrats but legislate like Republicans" - of course that held until 2010 - when running across open field country as a Republican didn't have goose hunters lining up crosshairs.

Had to check - "Super Tuesday" isn't so Southern monolithic as in the past. And I know damned well you'll like this sentence:

"On the other hand, if Romney gets off to a strong start in January’s opening round, then there might be pressure on the right to enlist former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to pick up the anti-establishment baton."

http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/republicanracelateentry/

[David Duff]

Interesting - even possible - but I think unlikely.