Thursday, January 17, 2008

'08 Election Cycle

Ok, so we are all wondering, "What happened to Reagan conservatism?" The truth is the principles are still out there, but unfortunately no Republican candidate in this election cycle supports all of the Reagan conservative values. An analytical look at the candidate’s records and rhetoric can tell you who best fits the mold. Again, there are no Reaganites in the race. They are all wannabes... This is personally disappointing, but it is the sad reality.

The basic issues this cycle are the same as they have been for decades (appointment of strict constitutionalists to the SCOTUS, smaller government, lower taxes, strong military, etc..), with the added importance (at least in conservative circles) of winning the war on radical Islamic fascism and immigration reform. There is a great site,, that will take you through each candidate’s record on crucial issues.

Here's my synopsis of the '08 elections cycle as it stands today. Despite Obama's best efforts, the Clinton machine will roll over him and secure the nomination. It is widely speculated that Mrs. Bill Clinton has already chosen Evan Bayh (D-IN) as her running mate. However, in the race so far, she has had to take very moderate positions in nearly every far left-wing issue. This erodes her base. She may be forced to pick a far left running mate to shore up that faction of the party. In this case, Barack Hussein Obama seems like the right choice, as he would also guarantee the minority vote.

So then the question becomes, "Who can beat a Clinton/Obama?" (or Clinton/Bayh)

Without regard to my opinion of who would be best suited to run the country, Mccain seems like the only Republican candidate who would stand a chance. If the biggest issue is going to be the war on radical Islam, Clinton equals surrender, while Mccain (despite his stand on torture) advocates winning the war on radical Islam. Some of the other issues he'd win on are controlling government spending, de-federalizing education, etc... Mccain has enough appeal to the moderates (i.e., liberals) that he will steal votes from Hillary. However, will it be enough to replace the far right conservatives that may choose to sit out? Time will tell.

Now, for my choice. Since there is no "Ronaldus Magnus" type in the race I laid out the issues then assigned them a weighted value based on my view of their importance to me and scored each candidate accordingly. I have given the most weight to principles & values since I believe this is a much better judge of how a president, when faced with critical decisions, will come down on the issues. I identify most closely with Mike Huckabee. I don’t like his record on immigration, raising taxes, and on social welfare type issues. However, I recognize that governing a state is different than governing a nation. There are certain mandates from the federal government that states are required to submit too (i.e., educational, infrastructure, etc...) to which a president is not bound.

Also, I like his support of the Fair Tax. He is the only candidate who "gets it". Personal and corporate income tax, capital gains, etc... are all taxes on productivity. The US still has the world's 3rd highest corporate income tax (after Japan & Germany). I'm not here to sell you on the Fair Tax, you can learn more about it on your own at: . Having said that, I like that Mike is openly discussing the fair tax, because changing to the fair tax would have the largest impact on the economy in the history of this nation.

I do believe Mitt Romney, as of today, probably is probably better suited to drive change in Washington D.C. because of his corporate experience. I am by no means equating corporate America and the US Congress, for one while both are driven by their market, their decision making processes are diametrically opposed to each other. Corporate America makes decisions based on profit motive guided by identifying and fulfilling customer needs. Corporation are quick to kill projects that are not profitable & productive. The government, on the other hand, is a giant behemoth that wants to redistribute wealth (after skimming off enough money to line the politicians pockets) in order to keep buying votes for reelection. Having said that, I looked into how Romney approached his governorship in Massachusetts and I liked it. I believe that same approach could work at the federal level.

I also believe that Fred Thompson probably has the most conservative record on any Republican, but he has not shown the initiative to do the campaigning that it takes to get the job. (I actually like that, but it will keep him a fringe candidate.)

So who would Mccain choose as his Vice Presidential candidate? We shall see… It all depends on who the Democrats nominate. A Hillary/Obama ticket will be much more difficult to defend in some ways (common sense would tell you that they would garner more women & minority votes) and easier in others (it would be so far left that it might turn off some moderates). Fred Thompson & Mccain are close friends and Fred would strength the conservative base (as would Huckabee). However, a Hillary/Obama ticket would require "balancing the ticket" with a woman and/or minority as a running mate. (think Michael Steele, JC Watts, Kay Bailey Hutchison, etc...)

Some of you may wonder why I have not mentioned Rudy Giuliani yet. I don’t believe Rudy is a serious contender, nor do I believe he can be considered a serious conservative. I do not believe he is electable. Aside from name recognition and his stance on the war on radical Islam, he has nothing to offer to the Republican Party. Besides, two candidates from the same state would be an awful thing for the American political system.

And as for Ron Paul, well..... Not such big fan.....

No comments: