Okay, here’s the deal: I originally had planned what I thought would be a very interesting post about the concept of political rights and what that has to do with everything. Unfortunately, other events intervened. I have a mid-term exam today (yes, even in grad school, we still have those), and my computer’s had some viruses and other problems recently, so I’m skittish about using it too much anyway. So for now, we’re going to have another question time/open thread post. Maybe I can get back to more lengthy discussions next week.
It’s no secret that few of us think much of the politicians in Washington, or of the leaders of the GOP, or of the non-official opinion makers. What I want to know is, who, if anyone, do you admire, and see as a great potential leader for conservatism? It doesn’t have to be an elected official; it can be a private figure like Dr. Ben Carson, or a talk radio guy who you think “gets it” (shut it, Andrew), or just whoever. Who would you like to see at the forefront of the conservative/Republican/libertarian movement?
Personally, I’m still holding a torch for Bobby Jindal, but he’s just one of many. If you’ve got someone you want to make a case for, persuade me. (Or persuade other people, too. I’m a well-known intransigent.)
Thoughts?
48 comments:
Rav, I hate to say this, but it is probably too soon to say. Certainly I don't want to see Santorum gain headway. Our party needs fresh faces, and someone other than old white men. Sure ideas should matter, but presidential politics are also about leadership. As much as I like Paul Ryan, he isn't charismatic enough. We have done best with governors, but Perry and some of the other governors who didn't run didn't fill the bill. I like the fact Rubio at least proposed something so far. As often discussed here, we have to become a party of solutions. That isn't an easy sell right now because we believe we have to seriously deal with our entitlement spending. As long as people have come to rely on the government, it becomes harder to convince they have to make some changes or there will be no programs.
Bobby Jindal maybe. Rubio maybe. Paul Rand maybe. The rest are playing political "Groundhog Day."
Jed, speaking just for me, I would really like to see someone in our crop of Tea Party senators break out publicly. Rand Paul and Rubio have both made kind of a splash; I wish we heard more from guys like Pat Toomey, Mike Lee, Tim Scott, and Ron Johnson, all of whom are very sharp guys who seem to represent what the Tea Party is all about.
I'd especially like to see more out of Tim Scott, not just because he's black but because he's very much a self-made man. He gave a speech at CPAC today about having a rather impoverished youth and working his way up to become a businessman; we need more of that as our message.
Andrew, not Scott Walker? Not that I'm trying to cheerlead him particularly, just asking. He seems to have accomplished more in real terms than anyone in Congress.
T-Rav, Right now it's really "none of the above" -- no one impresses me that they "get it" yet. Jindal seems to get the problem, but I don't see that he has a solution. Rand and Rubio get it on single issues -- immigration/civil liberties -- but I don't see them getting it on other issues. The rest of the party is stuck on stupid.... and talk radio is stuck on screaming moron.
As for Walker, I'm not sure what he offers? He got conservatives all hot and bothered fighting the unions, but that's not going to win the public. Beyond that, I don't see that he's offered anything to close any of the gaps that will doom our side.
Christie likewise offers nothing. He thinks he can win the middle by attacking the right. That won't work. And beyond that, he offers nothing.
Ryan is going down the absolutely wrong track with his budget work. He's stuck in the land of the wonks.
You mention Carson and I don't know much about him at this point, but I've gotten several e-mails from his supporters which make me leery. They are pimping him as "the vessel for the voice of God." Uh, no.
Jeb Bush... shoot me now.
Newt. Perry. Santorum. Cronies.
Thaddeus McCotter needs to get back in some kind of setting where his amazing mind can get the conservative message to the masses. Not only do I think the "We the People: Wide Awake for Our Newest Birth of Freedom" pamphlet he authored while on the Republican House Policy Committee still a must-read for anyone who wants to communicate our core and beyond beliefs, few exist in our ranks who can effectively and hilariously navigate pop culture like Thaddeus.
Red Eye, you've been long overdue having him in your studios.
Eric, Good call. I'd forgotten about McCotter. He certainly doesn't have the name recognition to lead the party, but he's got a lot of really good ideas and he's quite comfortable with the public at large.
Dr. Emmett Brown: No wonder your president has to be an actor, he's gotta look good on television.
Personally, I'm looking for a young, non crazy version of Newt Gingrich - and not seeing him/her anywhere.
Andrew -
Bobby Jindal maybe. Rubio maybe. Paul Rand maybe. The rest are playing political "Groundhog Day."
Paul Rand, the graphic designer?! I'm in! ;-)
I know he is new on the scene, but does anyone formed any opinions on Ted Cruz?
Andrew and EPluribus, I don't know about McCotter. Personally, I like the guy, and he might be good as an opinion-driver; but the fiasco over losing his seat last year makes me question his organizational skills and general attentiveness. He might be better suited to private than public life.
Bev, I haven't yet. He seems to be genuinely conservative, and his schooling of Feinstein the other day was pretty sweet. But I don't know a whole lot about him beyond that.
If anyone is interested in the McCotter pamphlet, I've located it here: LINK
Let me know if my link is a failure, BTW.
tryanmax, it works.
I scanned through it. Kind of vague in a few places, but I like that he talks about what conservatives are for, not what they're against. Keeping it positive is essential.
And I hear my books calling. You guys are on your own for a while, sorry.
Study hard, T-Rav!
Jim Geraghty said that TX Rep Louie Gohmert did a good job at CPAC as did SC's Tim Scott.
Cruz is making a splash in DC, that's for sure. He's got some Bush connections in TX, which have caused some speculation that these are why McCain went after him so hard on the filibuster. But rising politicians in TX are very likely to have GWB connections somewhere, so (Andrew) don't count him out for that.
This made me laugh - but some truth Andrew will appreciate, also from Geraghty's column:
Byron York: "Line of the day, from GOP activist attending CPAC: 'Can we at least have two Reagans before we have three Bushes?'"
I have watch a few videos of Rand Paul recently and I like what I see. It seems that he has the Ron Paul libertarianism without as much of the crazy. The libertarian idea of leave me alone resonates well with many younger people. I just am not sure about his other plans; how would he fix problems.
Scott, That's the guy. Who did you think I was talking about? :)
Bev, My opinion of Cruz is in flux. He's played with the crazies and he's played with the straights. So I'm not sure which way he will go yet.
rlaWTX, Isn't that the truth.
Koshcat, That's been my impression of Rand Paul as well -- Ron Paul without the crazy. And he does seem to be drawing in young people. I guess we'll see how he does. So far I view him in my top 3 of possibles.
The GOP needs to work with what it's got. It's got several appealing people who are considered good in their specialty, but none of whom are the total package. Many of them have been mentioned above. All these people need to be packaged as a team as a means of forwarding the conservative message. That would go a long way toward fixing the muddled messaging of the party. Some of that has happened naturally: Paul Ryan is the economics guy. Marco Rubio is the immigration guy. Rand Paul just broke out as the civil liberties guy. It's what's happening, it's positive, and so it may as well be run with. Otherwise, it will leave the GOP's control and guess who will pick it up...
That's the way to prime the pump for 2016. The GOP should assemble a "dream team" now and have a leader emerge from among them post-2014. In the span between elections, the "dream team" should posture themselves as an alternate cabinet--regardless whether they will actually take cabinet posts--and naturally their "captain" would be the ersatz president. This is basically a just step above what Obama did in his 2008 campaign, which was largely creating an image of Obama as "presidential."
tryanmax, I like that idea a lot. But let me add the name Jindal. I think Jindal is much more advanced on the economic issues than Ryan because he's actually woken up to the worthlessness of our economic platform. The problem with Ryan is that he still buys into the idea that fiscal responsibility is a good selling point -- it's not. I would elect Ryan as "fiscal matters" (like the team's accountant) and choose Jindal as the jobs/economy guy.
Bev:..any opinions on Ted Cruz?
My opinion? He's the next MSM target for destruction.
The presidency is part showmanship and part management.
People aren't stupid and don't want to be bored with wonkish details. I like Ryan, but this is where he fails. I still like the fact that he is one of the few that has published a plan and it would seem like an opportunity to use against the dems. The downside of having a plan though is that the dems (and their media lackeys) can sit back and take pop-shots at it without ever presenting an alternative.
Koshcat, That's something that is troubling me with conservative pundits at the moment -- they seem to have latched onto the idea that budgets and entitlement reform will somehow win over the public by showing us to be "adults." That won't work. The public expects responsibility, they don't see it as a selling point. It's like a toy factory trying to advertise their products by talking about how responsibly they've managed their company finances.
K, it seems like Cruz doesn't really care if MSM or libs think he's nutty - he just keeps on pushing. As long as he doesn't have any skeletons in his closet and keeps his nose clean legally/ethically, I think he'll survive an MSM onslaught.
rlaWTX-
They accused Romney of killing a woman with breast cancer and being a bully in high school. They don't need to find skeletons when they can make crap up.
As for the pamphlet; too long-didn't read
Koshcat, You must be one of them stupid public types!! Just kidding. The truth is that short and punchy is always the best and conservatives need to learn that. The public will not listen to lengthy dissertations. They want a small number of bullet points preferably converted to slogans.
Perhaps it should be cut down to three basic principles.
1. Civil liberties
2. Free and open market
3. Security
The last one can be a catchall including everything from making sure someone is dumping toxic chemicals to power grid to border control/coast guard to military.
Thanks for posting the pamphlet, tryanmax! Was an honor to be at a dinner where Thaddeus was a guest speaker, and he didn't need a teleprompter to highlight its main points.
To his fiasco, he just needs to surround himself with better people. He's the fighter we need to better tell the masses who we really are.
I think Ben Carson (who supports gun control) has no future as an elected leader but if he doesn't knuckle under to pressure he might become an interesting, sometimes useful loose cannon (think Eastwood for the Republicans or Cosby for the Dems).
My take on the state of the conservative movement mirrors that of most people here in that I don't think there is one perfect person out there but there are a couple of people who are doing what needs to be done.
Well, I'm back. I hope you people don't think I'm going to work through this backlog of comments.
So it sounds like we're agreed--Rand Paul/Bobby Jindal in 2016? I'll alert the RNC immediately.
I am not so sure that we need one messenger right now as much as we need a cohesive message that is easy to understand and positively presented.
I nominate a man who is patriotic, telegenic and quite likeable. He's a proud businessman. A real American. He is: Jack.
Bloomberg would never allow Jack or at least that Infarct Bomb.
Jack would beat Bloomberg by 90%. :)
At first, I thought you were going to say Jack Bauer. I'm rather less impressed with your proposal now.
Cynic! Jack would be awesome!
Andrew, I ate Jack in the Box once--a couple months ago, actually. I initially thought it was good. My digestive tract disagreed.
T-Rav - Why aren't you studying???
Bev, Clearly, he's not interested in doing well.
Rav.....I would like to offer a blast from the past: Fred Thompson
Telegenic (in a good strong way)
Has played politicians before (both on screen and in real life)
American (as not in an effete, Mom jeans, softball throwing way)
Outspoken wife (who I doubt will tell us what not to eat)
Neighborly (like the guy who'll help you with that fallen oak tree)
Actor (remembers lines and enunciates. Doesn't need a teleprompter)
Gravitas (Out the ass)
So there you have it. Unless he has some sort of Jeri Ryan history, why not? The Presidency has been turned into a popularity contest now anyway, why not an actor? And unlike Reagan, Fred starred in some good movies (Hunt For Red October) as a strong leader-figure, rather than someone whose lines would come back and be used as fodder for the chattering chimpanzees of the modern press corps.
In all seriousness, why not him?
Patriot, I like Fred Thompson, I really do. But given his bid in '08, I don't know if he's proactive and driven enough to really pursue the office. Plus, I feel like he would need to prove that he's an "ideas man" and not just a good-looking guy. I don't think he's going to be our man in 2016.
Fred's been busy hocking reverse mortgages, lately. I'd say he's done with politics.
Yeah, I agree. I like Fred a lot and actually supported him in 2008, but he didn't really want to win and he came across as just too old at that point already.
Post a Comment