Unlike most of his opponents, he has not "surged" but just plodded along, attacking when he needed to attack, and standing up to the blows from his tag-teamed conservative opponents.
In the weeks leading up to these important votes, there was a lot of talk about the conservative movement mobilizing to knock him out, yet they were unable to do that.
They appear instead, to have burned themselves out, by focusing too much on issues that are now non-issues. Same-sex marriage (more than half of Americans now support it), gay rights, abortion and immigration. It's getting old and at a time when the American economy is in crisis, people are looking for someone whose attention will be on that.
The conservative movement was successful only when they downplayed the social conservative elements, instead working behind the scenes to pursue their agenda. Ronald Reagan was able to play the role of a moderate, despite the fact that he was anything but. Stephen Harper appears to be having some success with the same strategy, though the extremism is always there just beneath the surface.
The candidates endorsed by conservatives wear their views on their sleeves and because of that, will never be able to win an election, when the majority of Americans simply don't share those views.
What is telling about the New Hampsire results, is that Ron Paul, the Libertarian, came in second with 23%.
On Chris Matthew's Hardball this week they discussed the possibility of Paul running as an independent, since he seems to be a hit with the younger generation. He's not a social conservative, opposes big government and government spending, is anti-war and believes that marijuana should be legalized.
He may not win the presidency, but could split the right-wing vote.
Mitt Romney's chances would depend on who he chose as a running mate. I actually liked John McCain and believe that he would have done much better, had it not been for Sarah Palin. The thought that she would be president if McCain's health failed, was terrifying.
Romney also appears to be reaching out to corporate America, where the real Republican clout is. In his speech after the Iowa caucus victory, he said that he would get America on its feet with the help of the "job creators", conservative code for lowering taxes for the wealthy.
Same old, same old.
Ron Paul is a social conservative in some of his views. He is pro life, supports the death penalty but dodges issues such as same-sex marriage by stating that it should fall under the "States Rights" argument. I like the guy, and I think he has a hell of a lot more integrity then most politicians, but I disagree with some of his political stances. However, Dr. Paul has spoken more truth then anyone in congress or parliament in recent memory.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't matter who wins...
ReplyDelete,,,,,,,
Death of the Liberal Class
…prefers comfort and privilege to justice, truth and confrontation.
Its guiding ideological stance is determined by what is most expedient to the careers of its members.
It refuses to challenge, in a meaningful way, the decaying structures of democracy or the ascendancy of the corporate state. It glosses over the relentless assault on working men and women and the imperial wars that are bankrupting the nation. It proclaims its adherence to traditional liberal values while defending and promoting systems of power that mock these values.
The pillars of the liberal establishment—the press, the church, culture, the university, labor and the Democratic Party—all honor an unwritten quid pro quo with corporations and the power elite, as well as our masters of war, on whom they depend for money, access and positions of influence.
Those who expose this moral cowardice and collaboration with corporate power are always ruthlessly thrust aside.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/why_prophets_like_cornel_west_make_liberal_sell-outs_attack_20110523/
I don't see a destruction if Romeny gets it but if Gingrich gets it yup there will be a nice show to look at
ReplyDelete